Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

June 2

Hu Jintao's family

Does Hu Jintao have any kids, any grandkids, if Hu Jintao have kids, are they born in 1963-1970? For grandkids [1] isn't the little girl shaking hands with John Kufuor at FOCAC one of grandkids born in 1990s? --69.229.240.187 (talk) 00:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Read our article on Hu Jintao which mentions that he has two children with his wife Liu Yongqing, a son and a daughter. It does not mention grandchildren. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I saw it on the article in section one. Hu Jintao have one son, one daughter. Hu Hai Feng (male) and Hu Haiqing (female). On this article they said son is 35 in 2006, they he will be born in 1971. But I can't find anything about daughter.--69.229.240.187 (talk) 01:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Then who is this women by Mwai Kibaki and a boy and a girl with Paul Biya?--69.229.240.187 (talk) 01:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Does it have to be somebody related to President Hu? The girls shaking John Kufuor's hand could be anybody. You can't even see her face. Could it be some girl who won an essay contest at her local school? Maybe its the daughter of someone else in the government? The article gives no indication who it is, and given the paltry lack of any evidence otherwise, I don't see any way we could decipher who she is. Even if Hu had a granddaughter, we have no way to tell if this is her. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The girl in the photo is almost absolutely certainly not Hu Jintao's grandkids. Children are chosen for tasks like this based on political outlook, academic merit and that kind of thing. It is unheard of for leaders to use their children in this role. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 04:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Swine flu in Antarctica?

Is it serious? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:H1N1_map.svg --190.50.68.16 (talk) 03:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I looked around on the news, outbreak reports linked to in the article, and 2009 swine flu outbreak by country, but I couldn't find anything about swine flu in Antarctica. It was User:Vrysxy who updated the map to include Antarctica. You should probably shoot him a message since I can't find a reference for the change. Sifaka ^talk 03:54, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Need The Following Census Information On Religion Within The United States

% of people who identified as Christians

• in the years earlier than 1990 (how far back? As far as you can go) • state-by-state today • state-by-state in the past

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Razzaskingquestions (talk • contribs) 05:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

You may want to check the Bureau of the Census at http://www.census.gov Livewireo (talk) 13:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I doubt that the U.S. Census asked people their religion. Edison (talk) 16:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Really? How are you supposed to claim to be a Jedi if the census doesn't ask for your religion? That's the only reason to fill our a census... --Tango (talk) 21:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The Jedi religion comes from an Australian census.
Sleigh (talk) 20:38, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The official U.S. Census simply does not ask about religion. This creates problems for those who consider themselves to be of Jewish ethnicity (even if they may not be particularly religious), but who definitely do not consider themselves to be German-Americans or Ukrainian-Americans etc. in the usual sense (even if their ancestors may have come from there) -- there's not really any official census-approved reply which they can put in the "ethnic origin" field which is in accordance with their own sense of self-identity. AnonMoos (talk) 23:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Not just doesn't ask about religion but legally cannot ask mandatory questions about religion (Public Law 94-521). Rmhermen (talk) 23:34, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Check the Association of Religion data Archives. In the US there have been religious censuses conducted by religious interfaith groups back to the 19th century. See [2].You may find the article [[3]] helpful, as well as the articles it links to. Edison (talk) 16:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Jaroslav Seifert Poetry

Where can I find the original Czech version of these two poems?[4] I don't understand the language at all, but I'd like to see how the original poems looked and might have sounded. Vltava 68 09:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Cicero on Plautus

Cicero spoke highly of the Roman playwright Terence. Did he have any (recorded) opinion on Plautus?? (added signature, which I forgot): It's been emotional (talk) 11:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Cicero ranks him with the Athenian poets for his "elegant, polished, ingenious and witty manner of jesting," [De officiis I.29.104] and even puts into the mouth of the orator Crassus a statement that his mother-in-law's speech reminded him of Plautus' style. [De Oratore III.12.45] In the lady's interests, if for no other reason, we may imagine that Cicero was less familiar with our poet than he implies. Norwood, G. (1963). Plautus and Terence. OCLC 405627

—eric 13:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Treasury Stock

When a corporation purchases back its own stock it is considered "treasury stock", basically stock the corporation owns and can resell when it pleases. But let's say a corporation had no debt (just equity) and purchased back ALL of its stock; does the corporation then own itself?

I don't believe this ever happens since it is a pretty silly way to use capital but in theory is this possible? And what would happen to the corporation since it's technically an legal entity (a person in many legal regards)? Maybe it would do a better job cleaning up the balance sheet then its former board of directors ;) TheFutureAwaits (talk) 11:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

It happens quite often, actually, and is called "going private". Many private equity funds and hedge funds specialise in this sort of operation. Rhinoracer (talk) 12:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Well right, maybe I should have been more specific with the assumptions of this theorectical situation. I'm saying imagine there's a corporation with no stakeholders, no board, just the last remaining executive who decides to quit but just before he does he decides the corporation will purchase all of it's equity and convert it to treasury stock (maybe I left a detail out but I think you see what I'm getting at). After he leaves and there's no one in charge and all of the corporation's capital is in treasury stock, wouldn't the corporation own itself? Who would have the legal authority to deny the legal entity of its possessions? TheFutureAwaits (talk) 16:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Corporations always have board members - if board nominees resign, the underlying owners become board members, whether they like it or not. Corporations always have owners; not least because ownership of a private company carries liability, and one cannot wish that liability away. People either have to sell stock (to someone else) or dissolve the company - and even if a company is dissolved its former owners still have liability for it (and for its proper wind-up), even if all its assets have been disposed of. 87.115.16.117 (talk) 19:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, I don't think I'm elucidating myself clearly. What I'm getting at is if there were no underlying owners/stakeholder/whoever, any individual with a stake in the company besides some people who had common stock. Then ALL of the common stock was repurchased by the company as treasury stock (let's say the stockholders made this decision). Assuming it was originally in a 100% equity (common stock) state of capitalization prior to the repurchase then there wouldn't be anyone else to be considered the owner.

At that point there is no one left in charge of the company so wouldn't it own itself? TheFutureAwaits (talk) 19:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Your question is predicated on a false postulate, namely "if there were no underlying owners/stakeholder/whoever". This cannot happen; there is no mechanism where a company can continue to exist but not have underlying owners. Even Byzantine schemes of mutual holding companies, eccentric wills, and the death or madness of owners or directors doesn't make that ownership go away (even if actually figuring out with whom it lies is very difficult). 87.115.16.117 (talk) 19:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Except if the only stakeholders were shareholders who then had their stock repurchased as treasury stock... TheFutureAwaits

The company couldn't buy its last share, there always has to be at least one shareholder. When a company goes private it doesn't buy all its shares, it buys all except those own by whoever is going to become the private owner. --Tango (talk) 21:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

See that sounds plausible, Tango. So then if (hypothetically) the company were to purchase that last share it would own itself. I agree there are likely laws against it, but I'm saying in theory this would be the end result. Do you guys agree? TheFutureAwaits (talk) 23:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The law would mean the transaction selling the last share was void, the company simply cannot own itself. --Tango (talk) 00:08, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I feel like everyone keeps jumping to this answer because they think "hey that can't happen, someone needs to own it". But since a corporation is a legal entity the concept of ownership gets very distorted. I'm suggesting that (although there are likely laws against it) ultimately there are circumstances by which no one would own a corporation except for itself. TheFutureAwaits (talk) 23:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The corporate personality is a legal fiction: a corporation acts through the mind of its officers, and said officers must by law act in the interest of the company's owner or owners. Who would be the mind, and acting on whose behalf, when that last share is purchased?

Aside from the fact that it would not be legally possible (a company cannot own itself), let's look at this economically. Let's say there is one share on issue for the company, owned by Joe Tycoon. JT is the sole owner of the company. Economically, the so-called "share" now represents the entire company, since the entire net assets of the company is one share. If Joe were to "sell" the share, he is selling the company. If he sold the company "to itself", what consideration would he receive? In an arm's length transaction, since he is selling the entire company, he must receive the value of that entire company. So the company would have two options for paying him: transfer all of its assets and liabilities to him personally, with the company henceforth being an incorporeal shell with no assets. Or, the company can liquidate itself and pay the proceeds to JT. In which case the company would again be an incorporeal shell with no assets. Either way, economically speaking, there would be no company. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I see a fallacy in "the entire net assets of the company is one share". The net assets are represented by one share; the assets and the one share are on opposite sides of the balance sheet. If Joe sells the company to itself, he receives whatever he (as corporate officer) chooses to pay himself (as the seller); what's the problem? There's nothing illegal about selling something (on one's own behalf) for less than it's worth. —Tamfang (talk) 16:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I was talking "economically" here - and impliedly assumed efficient markets and fair pricing. Under such assumptions, the value of that one share is the value of the net assets, whatever that may be (not book value: actual value obtainable).

If we abandon those assumptions, then we have to put in other assumptions that proxy the real world - it may not be illegal to sell something for less than its fair value, but it is illegal to 1) have a company with no members, and 2) for the directors to act other than in the best interest of the company, which is the interest of its present and future shareholders. See further below. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Excellent answer, thank you for addressing my argument and also pointing me to the corporate personality debate which I was not previously aware of. This is fascinating material, it makes me wonder if there might still be benefits to JT selling the stock via removal of liability, a tax benefit, etc. Of course this is all theoretical so there's no way to put a value on those factors but still interesting to consider. TheFutureAwaits (talk) 23:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Corrected the link in my earlier post. I had no idea that "corporate personality" was a theological concept!--PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 05:35, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't agree that there must always be shareholders; nonprofit corporations have none. Such a buyback would, it seems to me, convert the corporation in question to a nonprofit. —Tamfang (talk) 16:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

You're thinking of a corporation not limited by shares. Of course such corporations exist, but registration requirements for them are different. The company's directors cannot just choose to convert to a company limited by guarantee, say. I'm not sure whether in various jurisdictions you even can do so, but even if you do convert, the members of the company limited by shares would be the same as the company limited by guarantee, who upon dissolution have a right to a distribution of the company's net assets.

A share, ultimately, is a security that represents the right of a company's member to receive a distribution of its net capital upon dissolution. But it is membership in the company, not the share per se, that entitles the member to the distribution: the number of shares merely marks out what proportion of the whole each shareholder will receive.

Legally speaking, a company must always have members, even if they are not shareholders. As has been pointed out above, it is a requirement for registration and for maintaining registration in any jurisdiction that uses companies law as we know it that the company has at least one member. When, as envisaged above, the last member no longer wishes to be a member, and there are no other members, the company legally fails one of the pre-requisites for being a company. Thus, the company must distribute what is due to that member. Since there are no other members in the company, the entire net assets of the company (net of sale costs etc) are what must be distributed to that member. A company that has no members is not a company; and not being a company, it cannot hold assets. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Did you perhaps intend to link to private company limited by guarantee rather than to private company limited by shares? —Tamfang (talk) 04:10, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

The "Art Deco" PAGE [Photo of black car bottom right of page]

I don't know how to change (edit)the caption under the photo of the black car near the bottom of the section. It is listed as a Nash Ambassodor It IS NOT! It is a 1947(I Think) Cadillac. Would you,whomever you are, correct the caption, please?Djlebeau (talk) 13:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC) DJLeBeau (Logo on the front grille of the car)

Hi. Hard for us to action this if you're not sure yourself. Why not post to Talk:Art Deco and see what the others there think? --Dweller (talk) 14:45, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I recognize the logo as a 48 Nash, but the body is 42. I removed the year and asked about it on the photo's talk page. I suspect it is a remodel with a 42 body and 48 grill. -- kainaw™ 15:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

It is a picture of a post-war Nash "Slipstream" Ambassador 4-door sedan that I took at a car show. There is more information on these cars here, but it is NOT a Cadillac! — CZmarlin (talk) 16:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

June 3

Why a slow rise but a sudden fall in the economy?

What are the reasons behind the often observed fact that the economy rises slowly but falls suddenly, like a crashing wave? Instead of slow/sudden, why isnt it slow/slow or sudden/slow for example? 78.147.251.229 (talk) 00:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

One reasonable explanation is that people are (on average) risk averse. That is, as things get better people will tend to be slow to believe that things are getting better. When things get worse, people will be quick to believe (and even overestimate) that things are getting worse. As people act on those beliefs (e.g., make big ticket purchases now versus later), they generate (or fail to generate) economic activity. Thus, economic up turns will tend to happen slowly and down turns will tend to happen quickly. Wikiant (talk) 01:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

This is a perception problem: it only looked slower going up. The four quarters prior to this down-turn in the US saw an average 1.9% real GDP growth. That’s the same as results for the year preceding three of the last six recessions. As for housing prices, the run-up was extraordinarily fast. DOR (HK) (talk) 08:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

It's for much the same reason that houses are built slowly, but burn down fast. It takes time to build real value, but losses can be realized overnight. For example, in September 2008, one of the world's largest brokerages went bankrupt, one of the largest money market funds failed (and no money market fund with individual investors had ever failed before), and there was a massive government bailout of the world's largest insurance company, all in a two-day period. Naturally, there was a massive rush away from any perceived risk, resulting in an immediate slowdown. It takes time to regain trust and rebuild that economic activity. John M Baker (talk) 17:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

It is questionable to what extent the increase in the stock markets, etc., was "real value". It was, in large part, a bubble. --Tango (talk) 17:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The problem with this is one can't define "real value" because value is subjective. By extension, there is no clear definition of "bubble." Wikiant (talk) 19:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

And even then, those terms only have meaning in 20/20 hindsight. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. That's why I said "questionable" not "wrong". --Tango (talk) 23:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

An example might be GM - took decades to build up, now in bankruptsy. I've been thinking that maybe its because un-truths are discovered suddenly, but building something takes time. By un-truths I mean things like Madoff's fraud, bubbles, or that the GM business model is appropriate for the current economic environment. 89.243.113.64 (talk) 20:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

It's true that, to some extent, a recession may simply be the revelation that supposed value was in fact illusory. But there generally are real losses in economic productivity, and these tend to predominate.

Note that the OP is asking about falls in the economy, not falls in the stock market; these may be associated, but that is not always the case. John M Baker (talk) 01:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The graph at the start of the business cycle article only shows a slow rise and sudden fall most recently: there have been lots of sudden/suddens in earlier decades. 89.243.74.161 (talk) 09:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Pro-Indian Sri Lankan Party

Which Sir Lankan political party is considered as a Pro-Indian? Sri Lanka National or United National? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.129.32 (talk) 02:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what the basis of a "pro-Indian" political party would be, when many Sinhalese are distrustful of India's intentions, while many Tamils have bitter memories of India's military intervention... AnonMoos (talk) 03:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Career In Photoshooting

I want to get a career as a paparazzo, if not, a photographer. How do I do that?68.148.149.184 (talk) 03:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Attend a college and get a degree in photo journalism. This page here: [5] from the National Press Photographers Association has some advice on choosing a school to get a degree in photography. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:10, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Any idiot with a camera can be a paparazzo. Even children can do that. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. Being a paparazzo is much more about where you go and whom you see as about the quality of the pictures. So, read tabloid press to learn about your targets.--80.58.205.37 (talk) 14:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Most paparazzi sell their photos through photo agencies, so you could approach one of them with a portfolio/resume. You don't say where you're based; in the UK, the Big Pictures agency has a website Mr Paparazzi which buys photos from the public; this would offer a way in. Googling "How To Be a Paparazzo" throws up lots of websites, which recommend first taking photos and then hawking them around newspapers or agencies. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 15:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, your ambition in life is to stalk celebrities and take photos of them at private moments, so that the public can satisfy their idle curiosity? I can understand someone getting into that because they couldn't make it in other photography, but I've never heard of anyone who actually made it their ambition. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Chinese online communities / discussion forums

Hi. Can anyone point me to a good English language discussion forum or website (if it exists) where chinese people discuss their politics/society etc. I confess I have a morbid curiosity to snoop in on what people of other countries are talking to each other about but I can't find anything for China. Thanks --ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 11:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

If you can't find much, you might find the reasons here. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 11:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

A more pertinent reason might be the scarcity of fluent English speakers in China? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I considered that factor, PalaceGuard008, but I was still hoping to find blogs of expatriate Chinese (lots of expatriate Indians have political blogs in English, besides resident Indians). Or I was hoping to find something on China written by a chinese expert (written or translated into English), on the controlled transition the society was going through. But I only found western viewpoints. But I understand language may be a contributing factor.

Also I read in a book that while we are struck by Saudi Arabia's lack of democracy, the people there are strangely content and reverential towards the royalty. I was looking for a similar clue about the thinking of the Chinese. It's a very important and unique country, so I wanted to know --ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 10:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

These are blogs, not forums, but I think you'll find them interesting. EastSouthWestNorth, Global Voices Online, Danwei. 121.72.205.147 (talk) 11:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Those are very good, pretty much what I needed. Thank you very much, anonymous poster :) --ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 15:45, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Rapa Nui mythology

Is Make-make the only god known from this religion, or are more gods and godesses known? --Aciram (talk) 11:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Here's a start: The book Handbook of Polynesian Mythology, which is mentioned as a source on the Make-make page, also refers to a god called Haua. And this book mentions Era Nuku, Manana Take, Taporo and many more. Looks like we don't have articles on any of them yet. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 15:41, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The Tangata manu article mentions other deities. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 19:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! They should have their own articles. Perhaps I'll write them! --Aciram (talk) 17:21, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Deportation laws (~1945) Alaska => Soviet Union

Where can I find information about the deportation laws (~1945) in Alaska? Background: Were there any cases of POWs who escaped from the Soviet Union to Alaska and who were returned? Would they have been returned? I assume, yes, but I can not find the legal basis. Thanks! --83.141.221.231 (talk) 11:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

POWs of what nationality do you mean? 87.115.17.103 (talk) 14:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Immediately post-WW2 there were Russian POWs liberated from the Germans who were sent back to the USSR despite requests to remain in Europe. Stalin regarded them as contaminated by exposure to his Cold War enemies and unreliable, and many were sent to labor camps. In the 1980's a Russian sailor jumped from his ship onto a U.S. naval ship, and the U.S. allowed Soviet security forces onto the U.S. ship to chase the man down, club him into submission, and drag him back onto the Soviet ship. So there were many instances of not granting asylum to random citizens of the USSR who sought it. So it is quite possible that immediately post-WW2 if a German POW escaped from a hypothetical POW camp in Siberia to Alaska that he would have been returned to the USSR if they requested the return, on the basis that he was not worth an international incident that would have strained relations between then-allies. Did you have a specific person in mind? Edison (talk) 15:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Interesting story. The background of my question is a fiction (see Clemens Forell published 1955) based on the experiences of a German WWII-POW in Siberia wo escaped through Siberia and Iran, among other countries, because "he had learnt that another prisoner who had escaped to Alaska was returned to Siberia". Whether this deportation is true or not may be of secondary importance. The question remains, whether the legal basis for a deportation was given in 1945++ . --83.141.221.231 (talk) 17:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The Pacific Coast might have been a military zone under command of the U.S. military in 1945, so military commands rather than civil law could have applied. Edison (talk) 23:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

liberalism and journalism

Why is it that in the US, a disproportionate number of journalists are political liberals? Is there something inherent with liberalism that influences them to become journalists, or do they start mixed and become liberal during their education, or is it something else? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 15:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not really disproportionate; you probably just think there is a liberal conspiracy against you because you're a conservative. It's observer bias, maybe? Or maybe we can go with the glib answer that educated people become liberals because conservatives are dumb. Or that there are no liberals in the US, everyone is conservative, and the rest of the world giggles when you think otherwise. Adam Bishop (talk) 16:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

You should see the Canadian media ;) TastyCakes (talk) 16:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The US media bias article mentions a survey showing 61% democrats, 15% republican which would imply that it is not really observer bias. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 16:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I think there is certainly a correlation with the type of people that want to be reporters and the type of people that hold liberal ideals. It is an "artsy" degree at school, after all. While there may be more of them, however, I'd say a case could be made for conservatives more than holding their own thanks to popular conservative commentators like Limbaugh, Hannity and (always obnoxious) Glen Beck. As in there are fewer of them but more people watch them. I'd say the bigger problem with American news is that people tune in to these kinds of political talk shows for more than just opinion, they go for the "facts". Instead of looking for information to better formulate their own opinion, they are effectively told an opinion by often extreme public voices. I think this has been an important factor in the increased polarization of American politics, and don't think it's good for anyone except the shrill peddlers of this twisted and over hyped information. TastyCakes (talk) 16:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

It makes sense that more liberal people would want to be journalists (or vice versa). Journalists generally value freedom of information and keeping the public informed, which suits a liberal ideology more than a conservative one. --Tango (talk) 17:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that's particularly true. I'd consider myself a conservative in the libertarian streak, and I believe part of that is having transparent information, particularly where it comes to government spending, laws and policies. Similarly, there are liberals who do not seem to care about twisting information to suit their needs: Michael Moore being the obvious candidate. But I agree that journalists often seem to fall into the "bleeding heart liberal" mould, probably because part of their motivation for becoming a journalist is exposing and correcting perceived social ills. TastyCakes (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

It's my understanding that 50 years ago, the Republican party owned the college-graduate demographic, but that it leans heavily Democratic today. Journalists almost all have degrees, so if you just took a random sampling of college-educated people, it's likely to lean left. Add to that the do-gooder aspirations of many journalists which TastyCakes mentioned, and you're going to get an even more liberal crowd. That said, I think the whole "liberal media" meme is wildly overblown. Books and articles by lifelong Republican Bob Woodward don't come off much different to works by his more liberal colleagues. --Sean 20:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

There's also an element of subjectivity. Sure, a lot of US journalists are Democrat voters. But from a European perspective, that doesn't really mark them out as social liberals. AlexTiefling (talk) 20:10, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

European liberals are called radical socialists here. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

On the contrary, European "liberals" are called free-marketers here. The Economist had an amusing essay a few years ago, remarking that liberal is a term of abuse on both sides of the pond, with roughly opposite meanings. —Tamfang (talk) 17:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Walter Cronkite has promoted the view that journalists tend to be liberal because they are better informed than the average person. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 21:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Journalists are likely to be self-selected by their principles. Lots of journalists get into journalism because they believe the people have a right to know what is going on, that government should be open to scrutiny, and that there are more important things than money. Believing those things make it less likely that you will be a 'conservative', in the US use of that term. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:49, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Gay Adoption Statistics

Does anyone know where I can find any statistics on successful and unsuccessful applications for adoptions by gay men in the UK. Since 2003 I suppose, after discrimination was removed.

Sounds like something that should be available, but my google-fu is failing me. Thanks 78.144.219.154 (talk) 19:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

You could try approaching the Lesbian and Gay Adoption Group UK, at New Family Social Group. They have a message board, and a section form research requests. Or try the British Association for Adoption & Fostering, which has some statistics on its site and might be able to come up with more if you ask nicely. Lisa Saffron has writen books on the alternative family, mainly lesbian parenting, but might have journalistic research leads as well. She was involved with Pink Parents, which now has branches all over the place. Good luck! BrainyBabe (talk) 19:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Joe Biden resigned as Senator in January 2009. Was this unconstitutional?

Doesn't it say in the constitution that no person can be in the executive and the congress at the same time? Why didn't Obama and Biden have to resign on Nov 5th?Jandrews23jandrews23 (talk) 19:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Because until the inauguration in January, he was only the P or VP elect, which is not an executive position (or even a job technically). 65.121.141.34 (talk) 19:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Right. Obama wasn't even elected President until December 15, 2008, per the Electoral College. That election's formal vote tally and certification didn't take place until January 8, 2009, per the Twelfth Amendment (with a date change for this particular election). Only then could Obama and Biden formally claim to be the President-Elect and Vice President-Elect -- and even then, as 65. notes above, those are not executive positions. — Lomn 20:06, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah of course. For some reason I completely forgot they weren't inaugurated til January. ThanksJandrews23jandrews23 (talk) 20:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Getting rid of the National Debt by a period of inflation?

Britain and other countries have large national debts, private individuals have debts too. Wouldnt therefore some inflation for a few years be good for everyone, both individuals and governments, to reduce the real value of these debts? 20% inflation for 5 years would reduce the real value of debts by about two thirds. I assume that wage levels would rise to keep up with inflation, as they did in the UK during high inflation times in the past. 89.243.113.64 (talk) 20:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

People have savings, too. Would you want to dilute the value of savings to benefit those with debts? Sounds like the Free Silver movement of the 19th century. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 21:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

20% inflation would be very damaging in many ways (see Inflation#Effects), it would also be very difficult to get rid of after the 5 years. As you say, wage levels would rise to keep up, which itself causes inflation, so you get a "wage spiral", which is notoriously difficult to break. --Tango (talk) 23:16, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The Nobel prize winner Tobin says inflation is good. 89.243.74.161 (talk) 08:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

He is referring to expected inflation. What the OP is suggesting is unexpected inflation. In the case of the former, people can incorporate the inflation into their decision making (for example, don't accept a job contract unless the offered wage is automatically adjusted for the inflation). In the case of the latter, the inflation acts as a tax on savers. When the government prints money to payoff debts, it is stealing from savers by reducing the purchasing power of their savings. Wikiant (talk) 10:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

"What the OP is suggesting is unexpected inflation." No I wasn't! There are more borrowers than savers, and many savers are also borrowers, so its democratic. Maybe inflation is bad for the rich - thats why the nobs dont like it. 89.242.95.175 (talk) 13:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Your generalization is not necessarily correct. Savers aren't necessarily rich (plenty of rich people are net borrowers). Consider the following examples of net savers: (1) the elderly who are living off of past earnings, (2) the prudent (e.g., those of all income levels who save up before buying rather than buying on credit), (3) working folk who are building up for retirement in 401(k)s. Characterizing everything in terms of "rich vs. poor" might be emotionally appealing, but makes for bad economic thinking. Wikiant (talk) 14:42, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

What would you expect to happen to imports/exports and international investment into Britian during this period? 194.221.133.226 (talk) 08:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Sightless Cervidae. 89.243.74.161 (talk) 08:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

This would undoubtedly be a very bad idea. While some previously fixed debts would obviously benefit, the real value of all the cash (ie savings) held by everyone in the country would reduce. Creditors would increase their lending rates to match (indeed, to exceed) inflation, so a new mortgage or other loan would entail an extremely large rate by today's standard. Everyone not employed (the retired) and anyone whose job's pay doesn't rapidly adjust to the inflation (pretty much everyone to some degree, government employees and such to a greater degree) would see a corresponding decrease in their real wealth, they would be unable to buy as many goods and services as they were before this "policy". Perhaps most damaging would be the loss of trust between lenders and the government: if lenders know the government is willing to flood the economy with money to stir inflation and reduce the costs of existing debts (ie ease the debtors burden by making the lenders feel the pain) they are going to be much more cautious when lending money for any purpose in that country. That would probably have devastating consequences that would rival the credit crunch of last year, and has been demonstrated in countries experiencing hyperinflation all over the world over the past few generations. TastyCakes (talk) 15:19, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

It is not working well for Zimbabwe, nor did it work out too well for Germany post WWI. I would say historical precident says this is a bad idea. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 15:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

And yet it seemed to work in the UK in the 1970s - Very high inflation, and I and my parents both got wealthier. Cannot remember how much unemployment there was compared with other times. THe difference may be that home ownership was common - much less common in Germany or I imagine in Zib. 89.243.88.190 (talk) 21:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The UK has 60 million people. You can't judge the efficacy of economic policy on the basis of what a small non-randomly selected sample experienced. It's like saying, "Lotteries must be good because I played one once and won." For the record, the UK experienced mass unemployment during the 70's and 80's. Wikiant (talk) 22:04, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

We were examples of the common people. Millions of other householders got more wealthy as well. Do you have any stats on unemployment and inflation during the last four or five decades? 78.147.85.112 (talk) 17:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

If you really managed to live in the UK in the 70s and 80s without being aware of the mass unemployment, I assume you weren't paying attention to politics or newspapers or the economy? Or much of the population of the country... This and this might be helpful starting points. 1 person in 8. Page 24 in this Parliamentary document is probably of interest to you, in terms of historical trends. And if you're going to claim that you are one of the 'common people', you're going to set Pulp lyrics going in my head. 80.41.126.158 (talk) 00:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

See Quantitative easing for a less dramatic version of your idea, that's actually been put in place, somewhat controversially, by HM Government. --Dweller (talk) 12:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Cop search legality and marijuana suspicion

If a US Cop suspects marijuana on a person, is that cop allowed to legally search you, even if consent is not given? I have a friend who has been bugging me about it, so I thought this might be the best place to ask. Please be elaborate in your response (I'd like to learn a lot more about the fourth amendments usage and application). ^blurred_peace ☮ 21:08, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Search of persons#United States says no, and cites Minnesota v. Dickerson. Students have a lowered right of privacy, as this link discusses. Tempshill (talk) 22:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, he might search you even though this might violate the Fourth Amendment, and you're not allowed to resist. They could then jail you and arraign you if they decided to be jerks; and then your competent attorney at trial would succeed in his argument that the marijuana itself should be excluded as evidence against you, and at that point you'd be off the hook; though of course you've been in jail for a bit by now, and had to pay an attorney. Also I'm not certain what the required threshold is for suspicion of drug dealing. I seem to remember one case established that an anonymous tip describing the dealer was insufficient to allow a search. Tempshill (talk) 22:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

There are two standards in use for this sort of thing. Reasonable suspicion is the standard for a police officer who wishes to stop and question a person; or to "frisk" a person for weapons (but not drugs or other contraband). Probable cause requires a higher standard of evidence to activate a search, but such evidence as a positive "hit" from a drug-sniffing dog may provide that probable cause. Of course, you should always seek the advice of a lawyer should you find yourself in a situation like this. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone who answered. I got answers from here, a legal pal, and from this video (for others who find this thread and need an answer compounded on to what has been stated). ^blurred_peace ☮ 03:32, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Socialist/communist locales in the United States

Are there any socialist or communist strongholds in the United States? If not, what specific area(s) have the most support per capita for socialist or communist resolutions or candidates? --William S. Saturn (talk) 21:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The socialist to have achieved the highest political heights in the U.S. is Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who probably could not have gotten elected in any other state. That said, you can't call Vermont a socialist stronghold -- the state house has six Vermont Progressive Party members out of 150 members. Arcata, California is one of the most left-wing places in the country -- it once elected a Green Party majority to the city council. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 21:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

While I don't have any data to support it, if you consider unions to be inherently socialist perhaps there is a swathe of blue collar socialism across the rust belt? TastyCakes (talk) 21:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, that is an extremely helpful answer. --William S. Saturn (talk) 21:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

And don't forget that in San Francisco, when Gavin Newsome ran last time for mayor, he was considered the conservative candidate because the main opposition was from the Green Party. Republicans don't stand a chance there. There are 11 members of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors: One is Green, one, Sophie Maxwell I can't find her party, and all the rest are Democrats. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, don't forget the upper midwest. The city of Milwaukee has elected multiple mayors who were members of the Socialist Party of America or other affiliated parties. See List of mayors of Milwaukee. Also consider the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, which is a state-level affiliate of the national Democratic Party, but is also a descendent of the socialist-leaning Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Many college towns lean left due to their demographics. Ann Arbor, MI; Chapel Hill, NC; Berkeley, CA; Austin, TX; etc. But that's a long way from saying they're "communist strongholds", which I don't think exist in the US, perhaps outside of intentional communities. --Sean 12:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

It is common to see shirts in Berkeley that say "People's Republic of Berkeley." But that being said, while they lean left, they are far from socailiasm and Communism in reality. Berkeley is mostly college kids (whose political demographics are about the same as anywhere else these days) plus long-term homeowners, who are usually pretty left-of-center but are most of the upper-class Green type than any actual proletariat.

All that being said—don't confuse Socialists with Communists. They are not the same thing, they do not believe in the same things, they do not operate the same way. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 15:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Nor do you have to be proletarian to be a communist - industrialists can be communists too! --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Why long for a socialist USA when you have beautiful White Russia and tropical paradise Cuba?--Radh (talk) 20:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Excellent, brilliantly placed and thought inspiring answer there, Radh. Oh, and you forgot everyone's favourite workers' paradise, North Korea. (seriously, why people think that they're being smart by giving the "well if you like it so much, why don't you move to Cuba" interjection to any debate thread that has anything remotely to do with Socialism/Marxism/Communism is beyond me. Besides, OP never once expressed anything that could be described as "longing for a socialist USA".) TomorrowTime (talk) 20:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Question About A Song

This could easily be on the language desk, so feel free to move it. I put it here because it's a question about a song. I also think I may have asked this before, but it might have been a dream as I can't find it on the archives (spending too much time on Wikipedia!). Anyway, to the point. What are the words for Transfiguration (et in Arcadia ego IV), by Aerenda? The title is obviously Latin, but the lyrics sound like Hindi to me. Can anyone help me here? --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 21:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2009 May 5#Song by Aerenda. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Cheers, Jack. I knew I could rely on you. Good job I said I'd asked this before (and thank God it wasn't one of my many Wikipedia dreams!). Still haven't got the lyrics, though, just an explanation of the title. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 05:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I remembered it anyway, KT, because I remember providing the Et in Arcadia ego link. What slightly made me wonder if this was related to that question or not was that it was only a month ago. (And I thought my memory was getting a tad dinosaur-like ...  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 03:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

June 4

Trading spaces

The Mississippi River is the boundary between many US states, but events such as the 1812 New Madrid earthquake have shifted the river's course, leaving little bits of most river states on the wrong side of the river, such as the areas that you can see of Tennessee and Arkansas on this map. Any idea if any pair of states have ever tried to swap such bits? Nyttend (talk) 13:19, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Often times, these bits of land are unpopulated and non-productive bits of swampland with little intrinsic value. One notable exception is Kaskaskia, Illinois which was originally on the east bank of the Mississippi, and is now on the west. However, I am not sure there is a compelling reason to do so. Either a) the land is valuable and populated and thus the state that has it probably does not want to lose it or b) the land is worthless and unpopulated, and then there's no reason to be bothered over it. It's a cartographic curiosity, but there's not much practical purpose in moving around the borders. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

A similarity would be the panhandle of Oklahoma attempting to join Texas (if I remember correctly - I doubt they tried to join Arkansas). The attempt failed. -- kainaw™ 17:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The Piscataqua River has not moved, but that doesn't stop New Hampshire and Maine from fighting over where their boarderborder is. APL (talk) 18:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Probably asleep in his dormitory, or maybe hiding in the woods.  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 20:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Of course, the difference there is over a very productive piece of land, the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard and that the two states have probably NEVER agreed on the location of the border. The borders around the Mississippi River states have long since been agreed upon; and they shouldn't move simply because of the fickle nature of the river. To put it simply another way; if a chunk of earth belongs to Tennessee, that chunk of earth should not change possession simply because the river running next to it moved. The issue with the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard is that there has never been an agreement on where the border really is; whether the border lies along the Maine shoreline or along the main navagation channel of the river. Its the difference between an unsettled issue and a LONG settled issue. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Tennessee River#History#Water rights and border dispute with Georgia and there I was doing an internship as a surveyor, 30 odd years ago, thinking it was only farmers having bawls and moving border markers :) Note "nonproductive swamplands" can become prized all of a sudden when your city needs to put a straw in the river. Rumor has it the surveyors didn't fancy explaining their trade to the local native population and decided to take their craft to a bit farther south than planned. Georgia would like to have the border where the line was on the map. Tennessee is fine with it staying where it is. 71.236.26.74 (talk) 06:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I am pretty sure the same thing must happen between countries, according to this[6] the Rio Grande (boreder between USA and Mexico) used to change course until it has been managed over the last century. I don't think that a few hundred yards of desert are likely to start a territorial dispute though. -- Q Chris (talk) 07:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

How wrong I was. There was a territorial dispute until 1967 [7]. This article outlines the "principles of international law governing river boundaries" : If the river changed its course by the slow process of erosion of one bank and accretion to the other, then the boundary moved with the deepest channel. If, on the other hand, the river changed its course suddenly by avulsion – that is, if it deserted its old bed and cut a new one in a short amount of time – then the boundary remained in the old bed even if it was now dry. -- Q Chris (talk) 07:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Rio Grande border disputes. AnonMoos (talk) 09:53, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

What does a bronze star mean?

I have been told that bronze stars, which are described as being awarded for "specific acts of bravery," are being handed out in Iraq as, basically, attendance awards--you show up, you get a star. I don't know where to find out if this is true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.166.188.99 (talk) 16:26, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Not sure about those specific criticisms, but you could read Bronze Star Medal for more background. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

While dated, this article may be of use. Note the discussion of the "BS" for service versus the "BV" for valor in combat; many discusssions of awarded quantities don't distinguish these. Poking around, I see suggestions that the Bronze Star was similarly common in Vietnam, so this is perhaps not a new phenomenon. — Lomn 19:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

If I may drop in a tangentially related point, a bronze star on a Wikipedia article (top right hand corner) means it's "Featured", ie of the highest quality. For more information see WP:FA and WP:FL --Dweller (talk) 12:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Name of English Industrialist

I am looking for the name of an English Industrialist (think industrial revolution). He had a really awesome name (perhaps kingdom was in it don't really remember). There's also a picture of him on around here (on WP) of him posing with chains behind him, if that helps. I know this sounds vague, but any help would be appreciated.--CM (talk) 21:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Isambard Kingdom Brunel. He was a really awesome guy. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:39, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for identifying this old school pimp. CM (talk) 21:43, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

"Old school pimp" doesn't mean the obvious as I can find nothing in Mr Brunel's biography about a second career in flesh-peddling. Is it a compliment? // BL \\ (talk) 22:13, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is. I mean, look at that top hat! He's big pimpin'! Adam Bishop (talk) 01:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Not just a fashion statement, I believe he used to keep a box of cigars in it (he chain-smoked them). Popular legend sometimes adds packets of sandwiches and various other comestibles and prerequisites. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 18:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Paul Harvey Essay

Is there a way I can obtain a copy of Paul Harvey's Essay on Missippi?G. Annie Hare (talk) 22:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

You could contact American Broadcasting Company and find out if they have a transcript or recording (assuming it is this Paul Harvey we are talking about). I'm not sure who the best contact would be. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:41, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Googling for Paul Harvey Mississippi gives this essay, along with a disturbing photo of Mr. Harvey. --Sean 14:31, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

That, btw, was his 100% standard press photo used in all stories about the guy, if my recollection is correct. Tempshill (talk) 17:45, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

June 5

Amadou Toumani Touré's wife

Since Jose Santos' wife is born in 1963 (which is 21 years apart) and Armando Guebuza wife is born in 1954 (9 years apart), then what year range would Amadou Toumani Touré's wife be. When he went to 2008 Beijing Olympics, Amadou Toumani Touré's wife looks young so is it most rational to suppose Amadou Toumani Touré's wife should be born in the 1960s?--69.229.240.187 (talk) 04:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

If you intend to make any additions or changes to Wikipedia articles, speculation about such facts is a bad idea. Find a source outside of Wikipedia before adding information. Guessing at someone age from a picture is not a reliable means of reporting facts in an encyclopedia. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Madame Touré Lobbo Traoré's official biography does not give her birthdate, only mentioning that she started school in 1962. You might ask at the French Wikipedia Reference Desk as probably many sources of information about Mali are in French. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 19:41, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Ship Access during Siege of Boston

March 30th, 1774:
The Boston Port Act closes the Port of Boston
April 20th, 1775:
The Siege of Boston begins, blocking land access to the city but leaving the British in control of the Port. Thus, the Royal Navy can sail in supplies.

Question #1 — When exactly did the closed Port reopen (albeit under the Royal Navy’s rule)?
Question #2 — Could a Loyalist have caught a ship back to England during the Siege, or was the Port only used to bring in supplies from Nova Scotia?
Questions #3 — How much did it cost a civilian to sail between England & the Colonies? Was the price different for men & women?

71.174.23.126 (talk) 05:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)Helice

I've stumped Wikipedia. Whoa. 71.174.23.126 (talk) 05:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)Helice

I'm probably the person who's done the most recent work on Siege of Boston. To partly answer some of your questions:

• I believe the port was never "open" during the siege -- it was only reopened after the British evacuation.
• Ships were allowed in and out of the port during the siege (and probably also between the closing of the port and the start of the war), but usually only if they were doing business with the British -- not all supplies, including military ones, came on military vessels. See Battle of Machias for an instance of this sort of economic activity that, umm, ran into some problems. It was probably possible for Loyalists to leave the city through these civilian transports (and maybe even on military ones). Note also that the British did not actually stop trade through other nearby ports (like Salem and Gloucester), although they did try to do so (see for example Battle of Gloucester (1775)).
• I have no idea what transport and travel costs were then, but I imagine the war drove prices up. This is not something the sources I looked at dealt with. You'd need sources that deal with colonial economics (or possibly diaries of people known to travel that would also have documented their costs).

Hope this helps. Magic♪piano 23:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. :) 71.174.23.126 (talk) 05:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)Helice

China's new censorship tool?

Youtube

What on earth are they thinking? Wouldn't it be more effective to arrest the reporter, confiscate their equipment or beat the heck out of them? The reporter may say something after they are released but at least they wouldn't get this stupid footage. 121.72.205.147 (talk) 09:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Better a stupid footage about China than a bloody one. Trust me, the Chinese government knows exactly what they are doing. They will lose more than they will gain if they beat ppl up publicly.

Beating the reporter, confiscating the equipment, and destroying the tapes would certainly be more effective in stopping that particular report. But these days governments have to be somewhat more subtle (AKA political correct) and that means largely using non-violent means and resorting to violence only when truly necessary. If the Chinese police officers beat the *hit out of a reporter on Tienanmen square another reporter (or simple tourist) just might film the beating from afar. Same goes for confiscating the equipment (or do you believe that reporter crews meekly surrender their equipment when demanded to do so by the police?).

And then the *hit will really hit the fan and everybody else gets what they truly want.

The beaten reporter can give lots of interviews describing how he became a willing martyr for the freedom of press. The international press will have their scoop and show the same images (in which the reporter is beaten) again, again, and again ad nauseam (it's mostly about the ratings I fear and many of us like to see a good beating - that's why Wrestling is so popular). Afterwards political analysts will blabber away how the Chinese government is so very evil and oppresses all political rights of the Chinese ppl. Other governments will take the high moral ground and make powerful statements describing "how they are so very concerned about this issue and condemn the unnecessary violence in the most powerful terms" (i.e.: they will do absolutely nothing but at least for a couple of days no damned reporter will ask them any embarrassing questions about corruption or incompetence).

Afterwards somebody might do an interview with the Dalai Lama and that holy man will express his opinion on the question of Tibet.

In the end the storm will pass and most of us will just buy our cheap products "made in China" (there are also a couple of them labelled "made in China, assembled in the USA" with a big American flag) exactly as before. Except the food (Chinese food = Toxic, do not feed to children).

If you were the Chinese government you just might be interested in avoiding all of the above. That's why you would give orders to harass the reporters only through non-violent means.

Don't get me wrong, I personally like to live in a country where the freedom of press is more or less respected. I can somewhat appreciate the reasoning and efforts of the Chinese government: "develop the economic might of China, hold the grasp upon power, crush all opposition for the sake of internal peace and security " but I truly wouldn't like to live in China (way too polluted). Faced with a choice of a country with too much freedom of press and a country with too little freedom of press I will choose the first always. But I'm somewhat of a cynic/realist. When certain countries invade other countries only to "liberate them and give them democracy" at gunpoint costing the lives of thousands and the person in charge is re-elected it becomes somewhat unreal when I watch commentators describing the Chinese government as an evil dictatorship. They aren't exactly nice by any standards but then everything is a bit relative these days, don't you agree? Especially when the American Congress and the President don't seem interested in closing down the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.

IMVHO what happened and still happens in that facility is even worse than the shootings and deaths of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 and you know why? Because all of us have already a very low opinion of the Chinese government and don't expect much of it (certainly not a shining example for our kids), while the previous and the current governments of the United States of America were elected through fair elections in a democratic system. The former administration managed to give orders to torture hundreds of ppl and were largely obeyed in a country living under the rule of law with a system of checks and balances. They tortured hundreds of ppl (guilty or not) in our name, in the name of our liberty and our security with the knowledge and tacit approval of many governments of the western world. Shame upon them and shame upon us. We are supposed to be better than that. Flamarande (talk) 14:02, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with the general tone of your political opinion, so I'm going to tell you off for having one at all: WP:SOAPBOX 213.122.1.200 (talk) 23:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, so if you had agreed with my tone and opinion you wouldn't complain at all and play the pathetic "rules card"? Flamarande (talk) 08:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Nah, someone with a different view would have told you to get off your soapbox. DOR (HK) (talk) 04:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

(ec) :Being in the way is annoying but doesn't hurt anybody or create any international problems. The Chinese government prefers not to be thuggish with Westerners, it's not good for their image or their economy. The Chinese government does not see themselves as some sort of Stalinist state, even if by American standards their positions on freedom of information and representative democracy look closer to that than not. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 14:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

American standards don't seem to be very high these days. I mean president Obama isn't exactly keen in showing and releasing the remainder of photographs of the Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse. Flamarande (talk) 14:22, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely right. Should have left the torture to the authority of the countries where the Gitmo prisoners came from so that we had clean hands. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 14:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Obviously there are a number of considerations involved in releasing such things—domestic and international. (I'd prefer them to be releases, but I can see the logic of not releasing them.) My point, however, was that it is common for Americans to project Cold War/World War II ideas onto the modern Chinese government, and that this projection somewhat limits the ability of Americans to actually make sense of their policies, as evidenced above. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 14:52, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Evidenced where? The Chinese government is simply interested in keeping the lid down on protests and vigorously censors any mention of the "Tiananmen square incident". Their main concerns are "develop the economic might of China, hold the grasp upon power, crush all opposition for the sake of internal peace and security". The press is simply interested in looking for a story about the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Nothing more, nothing less. Flamarande (talk) 15:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Evidenced in the assumptions made by the initial poster that they would find it more convenient or effective to beat up the journalists. Calm down and ease up, man. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 01:13, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I was expecting someone here to disclose that the video is a spoof and just for laughs. Is this for real? The Chinese government is okay with making a fool of itself on camera? ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 17:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

No this is real. CNN link But why the umbrellas? It didn't stop the report being filmed and distributed to the world. All it did was to make China look stupid. F (talk) 00:31, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

But it didn't make China look violent. Image the political backlash if they had beaten the reporter. It is way better for China to look "stupid" and harmless than violent and dangerous. No one will care about some umbrellas, or talk and remember it for long, but lots of ppl would remember a good beating on TV and talk about it for years (as we do with the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989). Flamarande (talk) 08:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Oldest Holiday

What is the oldest event which is celebrated as a holiday? I imagine there are many which predate Christmas. Also what is the oldest "ennial" (quadrennial, millennial, etc.) event that has been celebrated? TheFutureAwaits (talk) 12:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Many ancient societies celebrated the summer and winter solstices. If they got the day off for their holidays, I don't know. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 13:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Rosh Hashanah is regarded as marking the anniversary of (the end of) creation. Creation happened quite a long time ago. Even longer ago if you don't believe in it. --Dweller (talk) 13:38, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

If you are going for oldest continuous holiday, I am wondering if the Jewish Passover might win. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 14:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Philip the Arab celebrated the 1000th anniversary of the founding of Rome... AnonMoos (talk) 13:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think they get a day off, but they still celebrate that in Rome. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:52, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

P.S. The Locrians supposedly promised to send two girls a year to Troy for a thousand years after the Trojan war, but the tradition wasn't kept up that long (and it's extremely doubtful whether they would have been able to know when the thousand years were up in any case). AnonMoos (talk) 15:03, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

National Foundation Day has only been celebrated in Japan since the 19th century officially, but at least according to the article, it was celebrated long before that unofficially. (But I doubt it is as old as 660 BC, of course.) Adam Bishop (talk) 15:08, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay if the (disputed) date of creation was September 25, 3760 BC and “Rosh Hashanah commemorates the creation of man whereas five days earlier, on 25 of Elul, marks the first day of creation.[2]”” according to the Rosh Hashanah article, then did anyone celebrate the 5000th aniversery of creation on Sep. 25, 1241 AD (add 1 since there's no year 0)or the 5000th Rosh Hashanah on the 30th? TheFutureAwaits (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

According to the infoboxes on our year articles, the transition from the year 4999 to the year 5000 was in 1239. Not sure whether there was any celebration, but one thing to keep in mind is that most people in Europe at the time (other than monks writing chronicles and certain other educated elite types) did not very commonly encounter such dates in their day-to-day lives... AnonMoos (talk) 15:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Hm, I'm not sure if these info boxes are right, but then again I can't seem to determine whether the Hebrew calender considers 3760 BC to be year 1 or year 0. But logically it makes sense that 3760 BC + 3760 years would be 1 AD since there was no year zero. Which means another 1240 years would be 1241 AD. Maybe I'm making some error, but I'm not clear where. Also does anyone know how to determine what day of the week September 25, 3760 BC was? TheFutureAwaits (talk) 15:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Also, according to Etos Kosmou dating, 1491 A.D. saw the beginning of the Byzantine year 7000. As with the Dionysian year 1000 A.D. and the year 1239 A.D., I doubt that the mass of ordinary people very commonly encountered such dates in the course of their day-to-day lives... AnonMoos (talk) 18:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

To clarify my original question though, I'm really more curious as to what was the largest "ennial" (quadrennial, millennial, etc.)event. So for example we all celebrated the bimillenium in 2000 (or 2001 if you're picky). America had its bicentenial in 1976. So what I want to know is what the oldest "ennial" event that's been celebrated (eg a 3000, 4000, 5000 year old event) by people. TheFutureAwaits (talk) 18:00, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Such a celebration requires public knowledge of a common calendar system. The oldest calendar that the public used (that I know of) is the Hindu calendar. It is acceptable to assume that the people found semi-special events in the Hindu calendar as a reason to party - "Hey, there are three fours in that number! Let's get drunk!" -- kainaw™ 18:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

There are many many variations on Hindu calendars, and there isn't one unified era (chronological start point). There's a theoretical Kali Yuga era (3101/3102 B.C.) and the Shaka era (78 A.D.) but it's doubtful how truly widespread either was until relatively recent times. In many civilizations, the majority of ordinary people (who were not astronomers or religious scholars or international-scale merchants) were much more likely to date things by the regnal years of the local monarch than by grand theoretical chronological eras. British laws were dated by regnal years (e.g "33 Hen 8 c. 1" or "2 & 3 Wm. IV, c. 45") until 1962... AnonMoos (talk)

There's a letter to a Jewish community in Egypt reminding them to keep Passover that dates to 419 BCE. This might make Passover the holiday whose celebrating is confirmed the farthest back in history. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 20:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

In Asia, the Duanwu Festival (a public holiday in China and some other East Asian countries) commemorates the death of Qu Yuan in 278 BC. The Hanshi Festival commerorates the death of Jie Zitui in the 636 BC - the date is one day before the Qingming Festival, into which it has in modern times been conflated. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 03:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Massacre of 1804?

Can anyone confirm the massacre on the white on Haiti by Jean-Jacques Dessalines in 1804? I have heard that he gave order to massacre the remaining white people on Haiti after the final victory over the French. I am intrested in the Haitian revolution, but this seem to have been forgotten here on wiki, if it did happen, so I would be most grateful id anyone can confirm it, or give me a useful link. Thanks!--85.226.42.9 (talk) 16:10, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

There are links on the net of course, like these [[8]] and [[9]], but its always hard to know what is correct.--85.226.42.9 (talk) 16:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

By any chance did the version on French Wikipedia help? I do notice it is a shorter article. Tempshill (talk) 17:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank's, that does mention it, but only in a few lines. What I am looking for is a detalied description of the event. It does not seem to be as talked about as the other events of the revolution. I can find no mention of it at all on English wiki, not even in the Dessalines article. Perhaps it should have its own article, or at least section, here on wiki? --85.226.42.9 (talk) 10:37, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Empress and Queen of Haiti

Can anyone tell me anything about the empress of Faustin I of Haiti and the queen of Henry I of Haiti? Their full names and dates, and if they did anything significant? Perhaps a usefull link? I would be grateful. Thanks in advance! --Aciram (talk) 16:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

www.famousamericans.net/faustineliesoulouque/ (the link is blacklisted) says Faustin's wife was "Adelina, a woman of questionable character, whom he had married in December, 1849, against the advice of his lieutenants" Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 18:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

And see this for a bio of the wife of Henri Christophe. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 18:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. A shame that there is so little info about the dates though. --Aciram (talk) 10:25, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

cdl

I have a dui in 1986 and dui in 1987 can I get a cdl? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.215.131.150 (talk) 16:22, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

What do "dui" and "cdl" mean? Nyttend (talk) 16:48, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I think driving under the influence and commercial driver's license.- Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 16:52, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Call the local DMV (that's "department of motor vehicles") office near where you live. They will tell you the answer to your question. Since the DMV issues the licences, they would likely know best what the qualifications are for getting one. as an aside, I am shocked by the number of people who ask questions where the answer is easiest gotten by contacting the people who actually do the work. Some days its like one out of every three questions is like this. Sigh. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

It depends on the state; there are federal minimum regulations too, but they're surprisingly lax. A brief check of a few state DMV sites suggests that they will, but obviously it depends on a recent clean record. You should talk to the DMV in your state. 87.115.17.103 (talk) 17:04, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I would be shocked if any state would hold 22-year-old convictions against you. Your IP address suggests that you are in North Carolina. Their page only says you need to have a "clear driving record", which just means you're not currently under any sanction (revoked/suspended license, etc.). The federal page says you need to not have had any sanctions or convictions in the past two years. --Sean 20:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

which aria

[embarrassing whistling had been here]94.27.217.14 (talk) 11:51, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Might be Non più andrai from The Marriage of Figaro. Featured in this scene from the film Amadeus. --Cam (talk) 06:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! That's the one. I've removed the whistling out of a modicum of self respect, I hope nobody minds. :) 94.27.217.14 (talk) 11:51, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Narayan kavacham

I am trying to get Narayan kavacham in sanskrit ( in sanskrit alphabets/ text) and its meaning in hindi and english and also entite srimad bhagwatam in sanskrit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.73.20.250 (talk) 19:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

See Bhagavata Purana; at the bottom of the page there are external links to the complete work in Sanskrit and English – not sure about Hindi, but at least that's a start. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 19:46, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Obama's Cairo speech

[I am generally an Obama supporter]. In the speech, Obama said "resistance [to occupation] through violence and killing is wrong". Does this mean he condemns the French resistance of the Nazi occupation (FFF)? Jandrews23jandrews23 (talk) 22:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure he mentioned the killing of innocent civilians. I'm pretty sure French forces didn't do that. Wrad (talk) 23:03, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

While It is my opinion that any discussion of what Obama might have thought of events before he was born is at best, idle speculation, the quote should not be taken out of context. Here follows the whole of the paragraph:

Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered. // BL \\ (talk) 23:07, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Again, I'm pretty sure the French resistance didn't target children or old women. Wrad (talk) 23:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I expect that in some cases, they did actions or used weapons which killed children and old women as collateral damage. Why assume they were more pure than the armies and air forces of the allies? Ask the folks of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Dresden if old women and children were killed. "Bomber" Harris of the UK bomber command was a high tech terrorist, conducting terror bombings of civilian areas to try to break the will of the Germans. Edison (talk) 02:10, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, there's also a pragmatic argument in there; that blacks in the US didn't win freedom by violence, but by other means. By implication, that even though the Allies fire-bombed Dresden and dropped nuclear bombs on Japan, it was not that violence against civilians that won the war for them. (Now, I do not know if that is correct, but it seems a plausible claim to make) Jørgen (talk) 03:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Jorgen your argument is wrong, and the "plausible claim" is mistaken. Blacks gained their freedom through the American Civil War and not through peaceful means. Their full rights were acknowledged only much later African-American Civil Rights Movement (1896–1954). Flamarande (talk) 23:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The Civil War was run primarily by the White North against the White South for a variety of reasons. I think my argument stands. But I do not see the need to debate that further here. Jørgen (talk) 14:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the implied difference is that there was as war on during the French resistance. If the allies had lost WWII and France had remained permanently under Nazi control, it's not clear that continuing the resistance on its own would have achieved anything other than pointless bloodshed.

Or perhaps he didn't think it through that far. Who knows.

If you're honestly interested in learning what Obama meant, you might be able to get some sort of explanation from his staff by actually emailing the Whitehouse. APL (talk) 14:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

The question is clearly an invitation to WP:SOAPBOX. There's no way to answer it without getting into a debate about the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, which is not the point of the Reference Desk. I suggest that it be ignored. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:20, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

June 6

European Parliament election, 2009

The lead to this article states that "736 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and 18 observers ("virtual MEPs") will be elected to represent some 500 million Europeans, making these the biggest trans-national elections in history."

Besides the European Parliament elections, what other transnational elections are there (or have there been)? I can't think of any off hand. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Since the article is about the 2009 election, the sentence could be referring to the ones in 2004, 1999, etc. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The papal election, held in the Sistine Chapel, selects the head of the Catholic Church which is clearly a transnational organisation. In the 2005 conclave electors came from some fifty countries. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 11:27, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

That is, as far as I am concerned, a very generous use of the word election. It is just the top brass of an organisation choosing one of their peers to be their leader, something that happens in all organisations and companies. If you include the appointment of the pope, you should include the appointment of CEOs and Chairmen of every multinational company, sports governing body, NGO etc. The catholic church isn't more representative than any such organisation, in fact less, since bishops are made cardinals purely by the choice of those already in power, and are in no way intended to represent their home diocese or territory. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 12:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

If you restrict it to democratic elections then there are far fewer, certainly. Electing the board of a multinational company/organisation might qualify, they are elected by all members (although often the procedure is massively skewed in favour of the members just rubber stamping the decisions of the existing board). Electing the board of the WMF is pretty democratic and definitely trans-national. I don't know of anything even approaching the size of the European Parliamentary elections, though. --Tango (talk) 14:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

On some level at least, depends on your definition of the word "trans-national" - you could make a case that a United Kingdom General Election, which covers the nations of England, Wales, Scotland, and part of Ireland should be covered (obviously barely 10% the size of an EU election) --Saalstin (talk) 21:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I have lots of question about western culture....thanks for your help

1 4 guidelines that the Bible gives for marriage.

2 What other relationship does the Bible compare a husband and wife’s relationship to, and how should the husband and wife treat each other because of this relationship? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cylwin (talk • contribs) 04:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Christian_views_of_marriage might be a good place to start 203.214.114.8 (talk) 08:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The Song of Songs is a particularly relevant part of the Bible more used by Jews but Pope Benedict quoted it in God is Love Dmcq (talk) 14:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, check out Ephesians, Chapter 5. AndyJones (talk) 14:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, given that your course probably doesn't expect you to read the entire Bible looking for this information, you probably have the answers written down in the course text or in any notes you might have made. If you use the information the person running the course expects you to use, you're more likely to give the answers they are looking for. 80.41.126.158 (talk) 16:28, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

True, but no need to WP:BITE. Nobody's going to do an essay for the OP and anyway how would you feel if you suddenly had to write about the Hindu view of marriage for instance? Dmcq (talk) 17:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if it came across as biting; that was not at all the intention. If I suddenly had to write about the Hindu view of marriage and thought I was supposed to find the information from scratch, I would be panicky. I would be grateful for someone pointing out that this was an unreasonable expectation, and that I was far more likely to be expected to extract the answers from the information I had been given. This would also avoid me finding my answers didn't match the conclusions I was supposed to draw for the class.

Could you point out which aspect of my answer you found bitey, so I can avoid it in future? 80.41.126.158 (talk) 22:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, Dmcq, I agree that this wasn't a bite. It was an obvious homework question phrased earnestly as though it were not, which invites an answer such as 80's. Tempshill (talk) 03:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry yes I agree I was wrong. For homework they should be advised to look to their notes as that would give them the best chance of success. I just felt on first reading it said go away and don't bother us and even for homework that wouldn't be quite right if they had done some work or were finding it hard to start, but the advice given was in fact good. Dmcq (talk) 08:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the OP mistook this as a place to debate the institution of marriage. DOR (HK) (talk) 04:03, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Khrushchev's ethnic background

The article on Nikita Khrushchev says he was from Ukraine but doesn't explain his ethnicity. I think that is significant, especially regarding the Crimea dispute. Was he 100% ethnically Russian, as I've read on BBC News (don't have the link anymore, sorry) or something else? And was his mother tongue Russian or Ukrainian? 81.153.238.156 (talk) 13:13, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

He appears to have been Russian, and thus I'd guess that Russian was his cradlespeech. I'm getting this from an account that I have of the Khrushchev years (Fursenko, Aleksandr and Timothy Naftali. Khrushchev's Cold War: The Inside Story of an American Adversary. New York: Norton, 2006, 8.), which notes also that he was from a peasant family. Nyttend (talk) 17:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

He wasn't born in the Ukraine itself, just close by its borders in Russia in Kursk Oblast. It's peculiar, the article doesn't mention his birth or much of his early life. Dmcq (talk) 17:39, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Just fixed the article. It had been vandalized a couple of months ago and no one noticed this bit gone missing. His family moved to a town in the Ukraine when he was a teenager. Dmcq (talk) 19:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Oded Golan

Wikipedia's article on Oded Golan peters out in 2004 with him still on trial. This Haaretz article says the trial was still going on in April of last year. Is the trial still going on? Hopper Mine (talk) 15:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The Biblical Archaeology Review magazine has been following the case (the editor, Hershel Shanks, has a prickly relationship with the official Israel antiquities authority), so there might be something in recent issues if there have been any new developments (though since that magazine has a long publication lead time, it's not the best source for breaking news). AnonMoos (talk) 02:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

The most recent I can find is a Jerusalem Post article from March 31. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:37, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

moral rights of the author

On the copyright page of a 2007 book I found the following:

"The moral rights of the author have been asserted
Database right Oxford University Press (maker)"

What does this mean? What is the claim? --Halcatalyst (talk) 21:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it really means much, I'm pretty sure moral rights and database rights apply whether you assert them or not. It is, however, talking about moral rights and database right. --Tango (talk) 21:05, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

As the article states, asserting one's moral rights is necessary for enforcement in some jurisdictions. Algebraist 12:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Freelolita101 Talking

Is Lolita the orca's mother ocean sun? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freelolita101 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

For those trying to figure out the question, Lolita seems to be an orca who is in captivity at the Miami Seaquarium. And the OP is wondering whether another orca, Ocean Sun, is Lolita's mother. According to a posting on this page, Ocean Sun is likely to be Lolita's mother. The people at that site seem to have a lot of info about Lolita, so you may be able to find a better answer there. Dismas|^(talk) 23:58, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Population of Istanbul in 1400's

See how the graphic plunges in the mid 1400's

Franz Babinger says that Mehmed the Conqueror usually divided the poulation of the town he conquered into three parts and that one part was sent to Instanbul to increase population of that city. What happened to the population of Istanbul in the 1400's and why did it need to be increased by the people from other countries? Surtsicna (talk) 22:16, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Just general poverty, due to being completely surrounded by hostile Ottomans, and not having the resources of the rest of the Empire to maintain a city of that size. There was a diaspora of sorts, at least for scholars, to the West, and presumably anyone who could afford it went somewhere else too. Meanwhile the West had virtually abandoned the Byzantines, militarily and economically. When Mehmed actually conquered the city, a large part of the population was also killed defending it, of course. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:51, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for answering! Is there a source which confirms your theory? Do you know where I can get more information? Surtsicna (talk) 11:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's not really a "theory", just poorly-remembered info from books about Byzantine history. I use Warren Treadgold's "History of the Byzantine State and Society", which talks about this on pages 837-844. The Black Death was also disastrous for the population, and it was estimated by contemporary travellers that in the fifteenth century there were only 50 000 people there - pretty huge by western European standards, but very small considering that a million people may have lived there a few centuries earlier. You might want to ask this on the Byzantine Empire talk page, it's pretty active and there are lots of people there who can give you a fuller answer. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:37, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! I can see you're really trying to help people :) Surtsicna (talk) 15:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

June 7

Can anyone recognize these two famous authors?

Both of their pics have been disorted. Here is one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mystery_Author_1.png The other: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mystery_Author_2.png

Thanks! SandBoxer (talk) 01:21, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

#1 looks a little like Pam Ayres. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:28, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

She does not look like Pam Ayres to me. 89.242.107.227 (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Number 2 is Carl Sagan, I think (quite possibly from the photo on this page).--Cam (talk) 07:24, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I think number 1 is Anne Rice, distorted from this original portrait. ---Sluzzelin talk 03:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

philosophical analogy forgotten

I am looking for the title and author of a philosophical analogy, wherein a cat swallows its own tail, thus creating an infinite loop. It may have something to do with eternal recurrence, i'm not sure. I've been searching the web for it for days now, to no avail.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maladyfinally (talk • contribs) 02:39, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I've never heard of a cat, but there's a snake: Ouroboros. Is that what you're after? --Tango (talk) 02:57, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Maybe Maladyfinally is thinking of Robert A. Heinlein? The circle of Ouroboros is an element of Heinlein's The Cat Who Walks Through Walls, among other (though I don't think that cat swallows its own tail either). There's a bit more on Pixel the cat under Schrödinger's cat in popular culture ---Sluzzelin talk 03:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Norse or Roman Prometheus

Do Norse and Roman mythology have any figures who give knowledge to humanity against the orders of the gods, comparable to Prometheus or to the serpent of Genesis 3? NeonMerlin 06:12, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

There's some info here on the Prometheus page.91.111.74.247 (talk) 19:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

"Working with Liam Byrne"

Does anyone know where I can find the full copy of the leaked document referred to here – rather than just a few quotes? Thanks! ╟─TreasuryTag►Africa, Asia and the UN─╢ 06:54, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't find it with Google. The longest list (21 items) that I was able to locate is here. 152.16.16.75 (talk) 10:30, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

European elections - proportional representation or what?

I voted in the recent elections in the UK - particularly as two or three other people had entrusted their votes to me by not voting themselves. I thought the number of seats in the European Parliament was decided in proportion to the number of votes cast, but looking at the stats for the previous elections in 2004, the Conservatives got 28.7% of the vote, and 27 seats. About one seat per 1% of the vote. But the Greens who got 5.8% of the vote, only got 2 seats. Far less in proportion - two seats rather than six seats. So why are they not in proportion? 78.151.137.230 (talk) 09:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not simple proportion. The biggest party wins the first seat, then their vote is halved, and the new highest (which may still be that party) wins the second seat. If that's the first seat they've won, their vote is halved; if it is their second, it is reduced to a third of the original value; if it is their third, it is reduced to a quarter of the original figure, and so on. After each 'round', the party with the highest number of votes wins the next seat. Unless I'm mistake, that is how I believe it works. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 10:34, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

That seems a weird way to do it. 78.151.137.230 (talk) 10:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

D'Hondt method. Algebraist 12:18, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

The idea is that the number of votes for a particularly party, divided by the number of seats won by that party is as close as possible to being equal for all parties. Some of the lack of proportionality, however, will come from the fact that the country is divided into several constituencies, each with a handful of seats, so it is only proportional within a constituency, not within the whole country. --Tango (talk) 16:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

One major reason why the Green won fewer seats than their share of the vote might suggest is that there are only so many seats in each constituency, and in many of them, the Greens did not take enough votes to win any seats. A party which took 5.8% of the vote in each constituency would be unlikely to win any seats. The Greens only took seats in London and in the South East, where there are more seats (and therefore a lower percentage of the vote is required to take one), and they got their best results. Warofdreams talk 19:29, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Why is that system used instead the more obvious method of just allocating seats in proportion to votes, with some rules about what to do with fractional seats? 78.147.85.112 (talk) 17:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

That would be the Largest remainder method. Our article mentions some problems with it. Algebraist 17:28, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

No, it wouldn't. The largest remainder method is just one possible rule for what to do with fractional seats. All proportional representation methods allocate seats in proportion to votes, they just differ by how they deal with fractional seats. The D'Hondt method will always give all the whole seats to the right parties, it then gives the fractional seats out in a way that reduces discrepancies in how many votes are needed for each seat in different parties. They could assign all the complete seats first and then do the fractional ones, but this method is simpler to explain and gets the same result. --Tango (talk) 19:48, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

As long as they don't meddle with it. For the inaugural elections of the Australian Capital Territory Legislative Assembly in February 1989, they used a "Modified D’Hondt" system, a beast of a compromise between parties in the Federal Parliament, which proved so complicated that it took 9 weeks for the result to be known (and we're talking about a voting population of only about 200,000 people). In those 2+ months, almost no political commentators or psephologists were confident enough to make any sort of prediction about the outcome. We just had to wait. See [10] and [11]. The "Modified D'Hondt" system is now history, btw. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

UK MP's expenses - which political party had to pay most back?

Taking the amount paid back as a measure of the wrongdoing, which political party had its MPs pay back the greatest amount in total? And dividing this total amount of payback per party by the number of MPs in that party, which party had the highest per capita payback? 78.151.137.230 (talk) 09:16, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This Guardian page (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/may/08/mps-expenses-houseofcommons) has links to the data held in a Google Spreadsheets doc. It's just crashed my browser (safari) trying to do some manipulation of the data but presuming you can get the spreadsheet to work properly it looks to hold the data you want - you'll just need to manipulate it to be calc up the amount per-party (you might want to use some sort of averaging as not all parties have the same number of MPs - i.e. Labour have much more MPs than, say, the Liberal Democrats.) ny156uk (talk) 10:20, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

It was the money paid back that I'm interested in, thank you otherwise, but none of the links from the Guardian page priovide that information. The "mash up" link either does not provide it or I cannot get it to work. 78.151.137.230 (talk) 11:16, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Where to find detailed election voting statistics in the UK?

I want to see what difference my vote in the recent elections in the UK had in electing one candidate or another. Is there, for example, any government website where I can see the number of votes for the different parties or individuals in my particular ward or district? Hopefully compared with the previous elections? It seems to be very difficult to find this information out. 78.151.137.230 (talk) 09:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Most Borough (or Unitary Authority) websites have such a breakdown. For example, Essex has this site; Norfolk here (map at bottom). Where are you? Putting '[County] 2009 local election' into Google tends to work.- Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 10:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Blanche Parry - Lady Troy - Elizabeth I of England

Blanche Parry - Lady Troy - - I have written these entries. The information is totally accurate and given in 'Mistress Blanche, Queen Elizabeth I's Confidante' by Ruth Elizabeth Richardson, 2007 published Logaston Press. See also www.blancheparry.com (1) I would like these to be featured articles - I have rewritten the citations for Blanche Parry and Lady Troy. As it is my research I don't want anyone else tampering with the entries. (2) As a result of my research other entries need slight revision - notably Elizabeth I of England. - how do I edit this entry please? I am happy to submit my suggested changes to you first. REHopkins (talk) 11:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Have you read our policy on 'owning' articles? Featured articles are nominated here. However, I suggest you consult the Help desk first about this, rather than here which is designed for factual questions, rather than those on Wikipedia itself. You will need to bring the articles into compliance with the Manual of Style for Wikipedia first or ask somoeone to help with this. It is also advisable you ask the WikiProject covering Biographies for a review first, and also consider Good Article status. More information should be attained at the Help desk. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 11:18, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

You may also find it useful to review our policies on original research and conflict of interest, particularly if you are Ruth Elizabeth Richardson, the book you cite, Mistress Blanche, is your own work, and/or the blancheparry.com website is yours. This is in no way a criticism of the book or the quality of the research that went into it, but it is nevertheless a single published source that offers a new perspective on fairly mainstream historical subjects, and I can find no peer reviews or other information about the book online that would help people make an accurate assessment of its credibility as a source. A key criterion for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability; the site's rules do not permit the publication of original research as fact, although new findings and theories are often mentioned in articles along with a description of their source and any controversy surrounding them. Your phrase "as a result of my research" is therefore a bit of a red flag here - if you are intending to make potentially controversial changes to any article, citing this book as your sole source (particularly if you are the author), you may very well encounter difficulties with other editors, and a discussion on the article's talk page may be a better first step. It is unlikely that any article reliant on a single source could ever be selected for Featured Article status, or even Good Article status, and the article would be improved if further good-quality citations could be added. Lastly, I'd second Jarry's suggestion that you read WP:OWN. "Tampering" is not a helpful way to describe edits made by other users, who are as free as you are to make changes to any Wikipedia article. Karenjc 19:18, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Litany of the Saints

This article states in the translated Latin text lines with "V" [text] and "R." [text]. So a "soloist" (a priest I guess) sings the litany and the choir ("schola cantorum"?) is repeating it.

What does V and R stand for?

--217.189.226.92 (talk) 11:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

The V is "versus" (the verse, sung by the priest), and R is "responsum" (the response, sung by the congregation). Adam Bishop (talk) 13:16, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Terminator

Went to see the new film the other day and it made me think about the other three. It made me wonder how skynet was able to transmit commands to the terminators in the first three films is skynet hadn't been activated yet? Any thoughts --Thanks, Hadseys 11:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I haven't seen the fourth film. Why couldn't the T-series units have been working independantly? If they "require" constant commands from Skynet, the time-travel models were probably purpose-built without that feature. Vimescarrot (talk) 12:39, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

The Terminators were not getting updated information from Skynet. They were pre-programmed and sent back in time. They had "microchip brains" or something equally amusing. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 15:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This is correct, I don't believe there's any moment in any of the first three movies in which any of the various Terminators is shown to have received a command from Skynet after traveling through time. Tempshill (talk) 17:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

It is a fiction, written by scriptwriters. What they write may not be internally consistant in every respect. 78.147.85.112 (talk) 17:16, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Why are people ignoring the entertainment desk and posting questions about films on other desks?91.111.74.247 (talk) 19:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Given the subject matter of this question, perhaps the OP is asking this question in the vein of "Oh the humanity"? Tempshill (talk) 16:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Unusual classics such as Thus Spake Zarathustra, Against Nature

Is Thus Spake Zarathustra worth reading as a novel, or is it only of interest to philosophy academics? I have read Against Nature. Are there any other unusual classic novels like these two? 89.241.39.10 (talk) 19:12, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Our article on philosophical novels has some examples, eg. Voltaire´s Candide and Musil´s The Man Without Qualities. On a different level, you may enjoy Stanislaw Lem or Jorge Luis Borges. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

On your first question: We can never answer these types of questions because it's completely subjective. The best I can do is tell you of my experience. On a whim one day many years ago, I bought a copy. I got to about page 5 and thought "There's no way I'm ever going to finish this", and I never did. But if I had struggled manfully through to the end, I might have been saying to myself "Wow, I'm really glad I read that". Or I might have been saying "Thank God that's finished, now I never have to open it again". There's no way of knowing without actually reading it. If you're unsure, better to borrow a copy first rather than buying one. Or read excerpts online, or the whole book if it's available. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I battled through the tedium of Nausea (novel) and other classics in my youth. I got to the final chapter but I've never finished it. I thought reading classics was good for you, but with hindsight I would have been better off spending the time just going for a walk. 78.149.143.187 (talk) 10:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

New York parking violations scandal - article?

This SF Chronicle article mentions, in passing, "the New York parking violations scandal in the early '90s". Is there a Wikipedia article about that affair? I've found a few contemporaneous news stories like this NY Times one, but I've not found anything that gives an overview and final analysis (just what one would hope for from such a Wikipedia article). The Donald Manes article touches on it; the articles on mayors Dinkins, Koch, and Giuliani don't seem to mention it at all. Hopper Mine (talk) 19:37, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

There was a racketeering scandal in 1986 but we don't seem to have an article on it specifically. Donald Manes wound up committing suicide over it. Law and order based an episode on it. You could make the article 1986 New York City Parking Violations Bureau scandal if you feel up to it.

On an unrelated note unpaid tickets from parking and moving violations are a common form of abuse of diplomatic immunity. Sifaka ^talk 20:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Lebanon general election 2009 candidates

Is there a website where I can find who are the candidates for Hezbollah, Amal Movement, Free Patriotic Movement, Future Movement, Kataeb and Lebanese Forces? I tried some but most of them were in Arabic, not English. You wikipedia guys need to update your Lebanon general election, 2009 article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.54.111 (talk) 19:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

"You wikipedia guys" is us, as in me and you. It's edited by everyone.Popcorn II (talk) 21:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Pakistani constituencies

Is there site where I can find the list of Pakistani federal and provincial constituencies such as Rawalpindi-III and Rawalpindi-IV in federal and provincial governments and the candidates of each party? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.54.111 (talk) 20:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Bangladeshi politicians

Is there site where I can find candidates of Awami League, Bangladesh Nationalist Party, Jamaat-E-Islami and Jatiya Party-Ershad faction and the constituencies they contested during the 2008 election? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.54.111 (talk) 20:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

June 8

Britain and EU parliament

If Britain has banned Geert Wilders from entering the country, but he has 4 party (with the same views?) members in the EU parliament, is there a concrete political/legal conflict there as Britain is in the EU but is banning its voted politicians from entering the country? Thanks for info, --AlexSuricata (talk) 02:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Is there anything in UK law that says EU parliamentarians, or their associates, must have the right to enter the UK? Is there anything in EU law that says that no associate of any person banned from entering any one of its member states cannot be elected to the EU parliament?

Those are the legal questions, and common sense indicates to me that the answers are "no". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 08:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Supply-side economics

What empirical evidence, if any, supports the principles of supply-side and trickle-down economics? NeonMerlin 05:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Reaganomics#Economic record makes it clear that although there was an economic rebound that occurred after Reagan's supply-side-economics-informed tax cuts, economies are hellishly difficult to analyze, with every empirical result subject to challenge from people who think it's due to some other cause. Reaganomics#Support has more statistics (and the following Criticisms section has rebuttals). Great question that should be addressed at Supply-side economics, and I'll add it to the talk page. Tempshill (talk) 16:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Much of what we have seems to be at Laffer curve... AnonMoos (talk) 17:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Trickle-down economics and the Laffer curve are related, but distinct. The Laffer curve shows that it is possible to lower the tax rate and yet bring in more tax revenue. This can be shown to be true both logically and (give or take) empirically. I don't have a count to quote you, but my impression is that most tests that relate economic activity to economic freedom find that more economic freedom (read: lower taxes, less regulation) is associated with more economic activity. Wikiant (talk) 17:45, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Assassination in World War II

The Allies killed Yamamoto and failed with Rommel. But I don't recall the Axis trying it. Did they? Or did they just not have the agents/capability? Clarityfiend (talk) 07:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

They may have tried to kill Churchill, and ended up killing Leslie Howard instead. (Or at least this is what Churchill liked to think.) Adam Bishop (talk) 07:48, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) They had a lot of attempts going, but the thing about assassination attempts is that even though it's more dramatic to try and succeed or fail, a lot of the time when you see that things aren't going your way, you just abort the attempt in order to get another chance. Anyway, the destruction of BOAC Flight 777 in 1943 is believed to be an attempt on Churchill's life, for example. According to Churchill's bodyguard, Walter H. Thompson, Churchill's life was in danger on numerous occasions from nazi agents (and other threats). Because of the distances involved, American figures on the home front were obviously safer, but not entirely so, because the Nazis did try. Operation Long Jump could've been disastrous for the Allies, had it succeeded. the mission was headed by Otto Skorzeny, a pretty fascinating figure, and the idea was to try and assassinate "the Big Three" -- Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin -- during their 1943 conference in Tehran. It didn't work out, because Soviet intelligence uncovered the plot, but if it had, it would've undoubtedly had a heavy impact on the course of the war. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 07:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Further searching brings up Engelbert Dollfuss and Armand Călinescu. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:59, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Women ruler of the Roman Empire

Who was the first woman ruling the empire, officially, with full aknowledgement, not behind the scenes? Perhaps as regent for a minor son or an absent husband? Julia Domna and Julia Avita Mamaea? Are there any more? --Aciram (talk) 10:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Pulcheria was Empress of the Eastern Empire, first as regent for her younger brother, then later in her own right from 450-453. Later, Irene of Athens ruled as Empress in her own right from 797-802; this has often been cited as the jusitification for Charlemagne to be declared Roman Emperor as the West did not recognize the legitimacy of her reign. If you look at List of Byzantine emperors you'll find another half dozen or so women who later ruled teh Eastern empire in their own right. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, but I just realised I should have specified my question more: I was talkig about the Western Roman Empire, with a focus on the Pre-Christian era. --Aciram (talk) 14:59, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think a woman ever was named Western Empress regnant officially. There may have been Empress consorts who acted as Éminence grise, but I don't think that the Senate ever endorse a female as actual ruler of the Empire. Remember that Emperors, especially under the Principate, were expected to be military leaders first and foremost; most rose to power as a result of their military leadership. Some women, like Livia, exerted considerable "behind the scenes" power but I am not certain there were ever actually "official" women rulers. Even Julia Domna held no "official" position or authority, even if she exerted considerable power. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:00, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Not necesseraly female monarchs, I know there has been no ruling Empress of Rome, but regents? I have heard that Julia Domna was the officiall regent during her husband's absence, just like later European queen consorts were regents when their husbands was absent, but the article here does not make this clear. Julia Avita Mamaea, Julia Maesa and Julia Soaemias appear to have ben regents during the minority of the emperor. These are the only cases I have ever heard of. --Aciram (talk) 22:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

The last execution of heresy in Europe

When was the last person executed for heresy in Europe? I beleive it was sometime in the 18th-century. Does anyone know?--Aciram (talk) 10:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Christian heresy says schoolmaster Cayetano Ripoll was "accused of deism and executed by garroting July 26, 1826 in Valencia", and this was the last by the Spanish Inquisition. There may have been later killings by other religious authorities. It's possible that after this date some Muslims were executed for apostasy in the Ottoman Empire, though modern Turkey has been secular since its foundation. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 11:16, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

The last in the UK was Thomas Aikenhead. The last in England was even earlier (already in the latter 16th-century, Queen Elizabeth disclaimed any ability or desire to see into men's souls, and conspicuously refused to execute Catholics for heresy, but only for treason -- something which certain Catholic leaders obligingly made it very easy for her to do with stupid moves like Regnans in Excelsis, which declared treason to be a binding obligation on all English Catholics, and the incredible bloodthirsty ranting tirades of Cardinal Allen...) AnonMoos (talk) 14:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much! It would also be interesting to know when the last woman heretic was executed, Is this known? As well as the equivalents for the different countries; I'll cant ask that, but perhaps you can tell me the last heresy execution in France? --Aciram (talk) 15:04, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

examples of common charity causes?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.12.229 (talk) 14:09, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Salvation Army? The Red Cross? APL (talk) 14:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

A cure for cancer, prisoner and human rights, universal medical care, preservation of animal species, eradicating world hunger -there are as many causes as there are problems in the world. // BL \\ (talk) 15:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

United Way, UNICEF... Adam Bishop (talk) 15:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Cost of food?

Is there an index or way to calculate the cost of feeding an adult Canadian healthy food for one day? Or something similar to that? --69.165.160.171 (talk) 15:51, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

First you have to define "healthy food." Ask 10 people what it means and you will get 10 different answers. -- kainaw™ 18:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, I've seen blogs of people living off of $1 a day (in the US), and while it's probably not super fun eating rice 3 times a day, I don't think it'd be too unhealthy. If you're interested in how Canadian food prices compare to those of other countries, maybe you'd be interested in the Big Mac Index... TastyCakes (talk) 20:04, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmm Canada isn't in the article, but from the 2009 article Canada is given as having a US$3.36 big mac. TastyCakes (talk) 20:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, just rice would not be a balanced diet. You couldn't last more than a few weeks without some other source of nutrients. You need rice and something (rice and beans is good, that gets you all the proteins you need, you would probably be missing some vitamins and minerals, though). There is no harm in rice being your only carbohydrate, though, plenty of people in the world live off rice. --Tango (talk) 21:13, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

benefit concert

Although A Concert for Virginia Tech was a free event, I read $65 tickets were sold to the general public. How much money has been raised by the concert?69.203.157.50 (talk) 22:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Uganda and Tanzania guys in divorce??

From this siad Yoweri and Janet Museveni is practically divorce each other, article said Musevenis was exile in 1971. Is Ali Hassan Mwinyi and Siti Mwinyi together or divorce? Since we have no informations about Siti Mwinyi and photos of Siti Mwinyi?--69.226.38.106 (talk) 23:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)