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

July 30

Edit counter

In edit counter, "Unique pages edited" means how many articles you have at least edited once before right? Let's say it is 200. That means you have edited 200 articles one edit or more?123.21.106.219 (talk) 04:14, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, this is actually more of a question for the Wikipedia Help Desk however with my limited knowledge of the matter I would say yes you're correct, but also be advised that many long time editors either don't really care what ones edit count is or balances it with other factors such as quality edits, page starts and contributing to Reference Desks, Notice Boards, Third Opinions and Help Pages etc. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 04:26, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Sanitation for horse drawn vehicles in modern times

How do people in modern time manage to keep the streets clean where horse drawn vehicles are used? There would be extremely few areas where this occur maybe Amish communities using public roads to get somewhere or historically-themed towns. Most horses can't be trained to poop in heir stalls, which was why the streets of 19th century towns were covered with animal and human waste at least until the street sweepers can get to them. So how does the law regulate this or clean it up? I can't imagine that they make the owners carry a bag and clean up the mess themselves.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 05:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

This will of course vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but in some of them carriages have bags mounted behind the horse: See [1] or [2] for examples. Gabbe (talk) 06:13, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Wow I never knew they had bags. Why didn't they use bags back in the 19th century especially given these figures [3]?--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 06:21, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

It just wasn't the norm, and this dates from before the role of manure in spreading disease was known (say if it gets into the local water supply). Future generations might well ask how we could be so stupid as to release exhaust gases out of smokestacks, chimneys, and mufflers, instead of capturing and sequestering them. StuRat (talk) 06:35, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

In London, the Household Cavalry are followed at a respectful distance by an electric sweeper truck; I assume that the sweepings are used to fertilise the Royal Parks. Alansplodge (talk) 07:54, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

As a kid going to Walt Disney World you knew the parade ended on Main Street USA when the guys in white suits with the brooms and buckets on a stick were marching down the street after the horse drawn carriages. Aw nothing like that smell in a Florida August humid summer! ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 08:07, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I grew up in a part of Michigan with a large Amish population. There isn't enough horse traffic to really add up to much of a mess on the roads, and as far as I know there is no cleanup. Cars spread out the messes over time, and rain rinses it off the road. Some people shovel it out of the road and into the ditch if it is in front of their house. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 15:21, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

"There would be extremely few areas where this occur maybe Amish communities using public roads" There would be extremely many areas where this occur if one ventured a bit farther away from one's ivory tower. Try visiting Egypt, for example. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:52, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

As for the 19th century, see Crossing sweeper for those who earned an income by sweeping the horse dung aside so that the gentry could cross the road dry shod. Alansplodge (talk) 18:38, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

The expression after the Lord Mayor's show remains proverbial. jnestorius^(talk) 22:24, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Duchies, Counties, Baronies

In the middle ages, did a duchy usually consist of several counties and a county consist of several baronies ? Or were they all separate from each other as I think, obviously being different from each other only in that duchies were larger and/or considered more important than counties, while counties were larger and/or considered more important than baronies?

109.247.62.59 (talk) 10:28, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

In general, I think. It was probably more uneven in its installation in various parts of the former West Roman Empire taken over by the Germanic tribal aristocracies, and probably developed unevenly in each case. But that may be the way Charlemagne left it. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 18:17, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

No, in general for all titles, nobles got their grants and owed fealty directly to the suzerain (usually the King or Emperor, i.e. the King of France or King of England or Holy Roman Emperor. Which is not to say that subinfeudation (the act of a tenant subdividing their land among further tenants) did not happen; but it was a) discouraged as it added a layer of seperation of rights between the King and his subjects and b) even if it did happen, the sub-fief did not generally carry with it a new title; that is a local duke could not grant a new countly title to the holder of some sub-fief of his. While there was a hierarchy of titles (that is Dukes outrank Counts which outrank Barons, etc.) the titles still all derive from the king. --Jayron32 23:56, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

True, but it really depends on when and where (as all questions about the Middle Ages do). For example, the answer is different for France in the year 800 than it was in 1400 (and every other century in between). If Charlemagne was the king of all of France in 800, then in 900 there were several independent counties and duchies that had no real connection to the king, who ruled his own little territory around Paris. A count could be more powerful than a duke. Even a viscount or a local lord could be more powerful than someone with a higher title. The titles were traditional, and did not necessarily reflect the actual power or influence of the holder. And those counts and dukes did subdivide their own territories into smaller units - for example the Duchy of Brittany, which was independent all the way up to the 16th century, had several counties (Nantes, Rennes, Penthièvre, etc). Those counties had several baronies, and new ones could be created as well. These subdivisions did have a practical use, for the purposes of taxation, or raising an army; so-and-so, lord of such-and-such castle, owed a certain number of knights in military service to the count, etc. Theoretically all that military service was ultimately owed to the king, but not if the king had no way of enforcing that theoretical authority. (The example of Brittany is not necessarily typical, I just used it because I'm familiar with it; but that's the point, there isn't really an answer that will apply everywhere.)

Later of course when the king of France was strong enough again to incorporate all those territories into France, the old dukes and counts did derive their titles from the king. But then they are simply titles of nobility, more strictly hierarchical, and ultimately meaningless (especially when they still exist without the monarchy, like the Duc d'Anjou or the Duc d'Orleans). Adam Bishop (talk) 01:03, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Thnx. that was helpful :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.247.62.59 (talk) 12:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Burgundy was often particularly volatile. At one point, I think there was a King of Burgundy, a Duke of Burgundy and a Count of Burgundy at the same time, each ruling separate territories. And of these, iirc, the Count of Burgundy was the most powerful, and the King of Burgundy the least powerful. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 13:08, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

It depends on when you are talking about. The original Kingdom of Burgundy was one of the many shifting sub-kingdoms of the Frankish Empire (Including Neustria and Austrasia as more famous and powerful such entities). The second incarnation of the Kingdom of Burgundy is often referred to as the Kingdom of Arles so as to distinguish it from the earlier creation. By 1032, the kingdom was inherited and existed in Dynastic Union with the Holy Roman Emperor, so that the HRE was the King of Burgundy (along with being King of Germany and King of Italy and King of the Romans and all of his other plethora of titles). The County of Burgundy, the so-called Franche-Comté or "Free County" was a palatine county of the Holy Roman Empire, whose counts were powerful only in the sense of the autonomy they had. In 1405, the County was inherited by the Dukes of Burgundy. The Duchy of Burgundy was ascendant for a long time. The duchy held a position within France that the County held within the HRE; that of a mostly autonomous area that was only a nominal fife of the King of France. For a short time it was inherited by the King of France and incorporated into the Royal Demesne, but it was granted to a cadet branch of the Capetians, who held it for many centuries. During the Hundred Years' War, the Duchy of Burgundy even fought as an essentially independent nation, allied with England and supporting the Plantagenet cause in the succession dispute at the center of the HYW. It would also much later be the Duchy of Burgundy which would create the attempt at re-establishing the Middle Kingdom of Lothairingia, as Philip the Good and Charles the Bold inherited and took by conquest much of the Netherlands and attempted to assert actual independence from France. It is through the Duchy of Burgundy that the venerable House of Burgundy gets its name; its tradition and honors came to Charles the Bold's heir, Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, who was also Charles I of Spain, which is why the Cross of Burgundy has long been associated with Spain. Other members of the House of Burgundy have ruled kingdoms all over Europe at various times, and they all descend from the Duchy. So I don't think the statement that the County was the most powerful of the three historic entities is correct. Each of the three Burgundies probably was at different times "most powerful", but historically the most significant in terms of moving European history was, over many different eras, the Duchy. --Jayron32 11:59, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

SPITFIRE PILOTS OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR

I would like to know if my father in law Mr Leslie Gibson DFM is now the eldest living British spitfire pilot of the 2nd World War - he is now 99 born 13/05/1914.

Could anyone with specific knowledge of these facts please contact me Username marcusfaye ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcusfaye (talk • contribs) 16:34, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Assuming that the youngest fighter pilots were aged about 20 by the time that they had completed their training, that would mean that the youngest WWII pilots would have been born in 1925, so quite a bit younger than your relative. A quick look on Google found Squadron Leader John Seabourne, Squadron Leader Liskutin and Lieutenant Rolf Kolling (Norwegian), all WWII RAF Spitfire pilots who were still up and about a couple of weeks ago. Alansplodge (talk) 18:31, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry - I have just re-read your question and realised that I didn't answer it correctly. Perhaps an organisation like the The Royal Air Forces Association might be more help. Alansplodge (talk) 18:35, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

How British does one have to be? Mieczyslaw Juny MBE celebrated his 100th birthday on 1 January 2013 in Devon. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:13, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I think the organisation that could help you with this search is the RAF Museum at Hendon, as it's where many of the original records are kept. They do charge for research, but you can visit them yourself. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, the RAF Museum are likely to be the best people to contact, and they're used to this sort of enquiry. While they won't be able to research all known pilots and determine if they're alive, they may well be able to quickly inform you if they know of someone older. Andrew Gray (talk) 11:47, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Size

Is the US in possession of a nuke which is capable of flattening a region the size of the Netherlands? Pass a Method talk 16:58, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

The Netherlands is already plenty flat. If you mean "flatten a part of the Alps that is the size of the Netherlands", then no. The largest nuke ever exploded, the Soviet Tsar Bomba, would have caused significant damage to an area the size of the Netherlands, but no "flattening". The largest US bomb, the B41 nuclear bomb, had a predicted maximum yield of half that of the Tsar Bomba, but was never tested to maximum specifications. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 17:18, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

If you meant just causing destruction over an area the size of the Netherlands, a googled nuclear weapons effects calculator says the B41 could cause 3rd-degree burns over about a fifth of the Netherlands, and significant structural damage over a much smaller area, about 1/25th of the Netherlands (44km radius and 21km radius, respectively). A full-power, 100-megaton Tsar Bomba would be more like 3/4 and 1/10th of the Netherlands. Though note that multiple, smaller explosions are almost always more effective than a single large one, which is a major reason why cluster bombs and MIRVs exist: if the intent was actually to devastate such an area, 10 well-placed 10-megaton bombs would cause much more devastation than a single 100-megaton would. Lsfreak (talk) 01:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Simple answer is yes. Fairly certain same answer for Russia. Unsure if it's the same answer for China. I doubt it's the same answer for Pakistan and India, although unclear. Shadowjams (talk) 06:31, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

You have that backwards. Simple answer is no. The biggest bomb ever detonated was too small and was Russian. Rmhermen (talk) 13:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Sesquipedelian government agencies

Australian governments used to be sensible when it came to naming their federal departments. We had unexceptionable agencies such as the Department of Defence, the Department of Trade, the Department of Education, etc etc. Nobody really objected to the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, because everyone in their right mind just called it CSIRO.

Then they started getting the "inclusivity" bug, and feeling the need to explicitly acknowledge the various parts of some portfolios in their titles. So we had mouthsful like the Department of the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories.

We've recently seen the creation of the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. Even the acronym, DIICSRTE, almost needs an abbreviation of its own.

Is this approaching some sort of record for unwieldy, long-winded agency names in developed countries that no citizen could be reasonably expected to remember? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Aside

I know the Soviets had some absolute corkers, but they were off the planet and in a class of their own. The best (? worst) one I know of was:

• The Laboratory for Shuttering, Reinforcement, Concrete and Ferroconcrete Operations for Composite-Monolithic and Monolithic Constructions of the Department of the Technology of Building-Assembly Operations of the Scientific Research Institute of the Organization for Building Mechanization and Technical Aid of the Academy of Building and Architecture of the USSR (pauses for breath)

which gloried in the acronym:

• NIIOMTPLABOPARMBETZHELBETRABSBOMONIMONKONOTDTEKHSTROMONT (what, no article?!).

So, let's leave that sort of stupidity alone and focus on relatively sane names. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

See User:Wavelength/About Wikipedia/Articles with long titles.

—Wavelength (talk) 21:33, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Workforce reductions contribute to amalgamation of departments and to amalgamation of workloads. For the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education, there is presumably a person with the title "Minister of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education".

—Wavelength (talk) 00:49, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Not exactly. Until 1987, if there was a Minister for X, you could be confident there was a Department of X that he and only he administered. And vice-versa. But since then, a minister can administer multiple departments, and a department can be run by multiple ministers (and parliamentary secretaries). The office-holders who administer the department in question are:

• Kim Carr is the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research and Minister for Higher Education

• Brendan O'Connor is the Minister for Employment

• Gary Gray is the Minister for Small Business

• Mark Butler is the Minister for Climate Change

• Senator Kate Lundy is the Minister Assisting for Innovation and Industry

• Yvette D'Ath is the Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change, Innovation and Industry

• Bernie Ripoll is the Parliamentary Secretary for Small Business. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 02:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

As I understand it, it's a more modular approach to minister portfolios: instead of moving areas of responsibilities between portfolios, there are now these sub-portfolios with individual (and stable) names which get shunted between ministers in reshuffles. Someone must have worked out that this is a more efficient architecture than shifting areas of responsibilities.

Whether out of bureaucratic expediency or simply as a matter of face, when a cabinet minister takes over a sub-portfolio that does not naturally belong within the name of his existing portfolio, the sub-portfolio name will accordingly be added to the name of his corresponding department (with more junior ministers appointed to take care of the sub-portfolios). --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:47, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Not answering your question but in SA we have the rather humorous case of the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. They absolutely insist on abbreviating themselves as D:EA&DP, lest anyone have the temerity to call them dead pee ;) Zunaid 11:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

As with so many matters, I'm afraid that the UK may have 'defeated', or at least equalled (depending on how you count), Australia on this issue. The sensitive nature of the power-sharing arrangements in Northern Ireland have led to some novel institutions like The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland. You may visit them on their website www.ofmdfmni.gov.uk [4]. As an aside, the UK body responsible for education has been renamed so many times that the official in charge took to inventing rhymes as mnenomics to help him remember. Thus the Department for Children, Schools and Families became "dogs, cats, stokes and foxes" in his head so that he could recite it fluently. Thom2002 (talk) 20:01, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Typhoid Mary

Did Typhoid Mary ever cook at least for herself after 1915? She was quarantined on North Brother Island in a cottage separate from other infected patient, did the health authorities allow her to cook fir herself or was she fed like the rest of the patients.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 22:31, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Remembering my studies on Typhoid Mary most of what she did and did not do was actually contrary to what authorities requested. In short, perhaps only Mary herself would know the true answer to your query since if she did cook it was most likely out of the eye of the authorities or other residents. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 10:59, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think so. Do we know if her cottage had a stove? Do we know if health official served her food on the island. I am sure food were served to the sick patients at least..--KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Both Anthony Boudrain (Typhoid Mary: An Urban Historical) and Judith Walzer Leavitt (Typhoid Mary: Captive to the Public's Health) said that the bungalow in which Mary Mallon was isolated (with her dog) on North Brother Island had a small kitchen. - Nunh-huh 22:02, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Danish universities which offer bachelor of education

Which Danish (or those located in Denmark) provide/offer B.Eds?Curb Chain (talk) 22:40, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Study in Denmark is a thorough Danish government list of universities in Denmark. Click on the red arrow beside each university, then on “read more about institutions and study programs” to see a list of degrees offered at each. 184.147.137.9 (talk) 10:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Strasbourg baker

When did Robert Koch investigate the baker in Strasbourg for being a typhoid carrier mentioned here and here? What was her name? Did it predate Typhoid Mary?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:01, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I believe a paper about the Staussburg baker was published by Dr. Kayser in 1906 (Arbeiten a.d. Kais. Gesundheitsamte, 1906, vol. xxiv. p. 176.), and Koch had first spoken about the importance of carrier status in typhoid in 1902. So the investigation would have been between 1902 and 1906, and would have predated Typhoid Mary, investigated in 1906 with results published in 1907. It's traditional not to publish the names of patients in scientific papers, so you'd need to see if the baker's name was revealed in historical, rather than scientific, works. - Nunh-huh 02:26, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Joséphine and Napoleon burial

Why aren't Joséphine de Beauharnais and Napoleon buried together given the trend in modern times of reburying people to either join families or repatriate exiled royals who died aboard? They are both buried in Paris too.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 23:44, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

What possible kind of reference could we give to address this made-up premise? You do realize they were divorced and he remarried? You know we don't do such speculation. μηδείς (talk) 00:21, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Biographies on both individuals, sources talking about burial at St Pierre-St Paul Church, Rueil-Malmaison and Les Invalides, written documents by the individuals or secondary sources mentioning thse which stating what their wishes were to be buried. Even modern news article suggesting such a move (for example king Harald III of Norway's body has not been located in centuries yet in recent times people have been trying to find it [5], this is just one example of something that has been suggested but hasn't occurred, and my question is if this is the case). You realize she was going to join him on St. Helena before she died and his dying words were, "France, armée, tête d'armée, Joséphine."("France, army, head of the army, Joséphine."). It isn't like I am asking what would the unemployment rate be in July, 2013 if Mitt Romney had become president. If you can't answer it don't say anything,--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 01:09, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Nonsense. None of those sources can tell you "given the trend" (what trend?) in modern times of reburying people to rejoin families (what family?) why the two have not been exhumed. You might as well ask why Jefferson's not been buried next to Hemmings or Washington next to Lenin. You have come up with a nonsense premise and are asking us to disprove it. μηδείς (talk) 03:17, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree with OP, the question is capable of being answered with reference to reliable sources - it is plausible to suppose there could be sources out there that say, for example, "when Napoleon's body was brought to Paris, it was decided not to inter him next to Josephine because...".

Your comments are not helpful Medeis, no-one really cares enough about your ignorance that you need to mask it by attacking the questioner. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

My perception is that dead bodies are usually left where first buried if there's no "secondary gain" for those who want to dig them up and bury them elsewhere. It's not done to honor dying wishes (except perhaps by living descendants who actually were contemporaries of the dead), it's done to score political points or earn tourism dollars. And for Napoleon and Josephine, there's no political point to make, and no money to be made converting two burial sites into one. - Nunh-huh 01:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Your perception is not a reliable source. If you don't have one don't make one up. μηδείς (talk) 03:17, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

See my comment above. Nor do you need to mask your ignorance by attacking someone who tries to address a question that you feel incapable of answering. No-one will judge you if you don't answer a question, but I for one will continue to judge you for attacking valid questions and constructive responses. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Your perception that I made one up is...wrong. - Nunh-huh 03:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

• Napoléon’s burial wishes are known; according to the French wikipedia article, shortly before his death he requested burial on the banks of the Seine. According to this book, he also mentioned Corsica as an alternative. It seems burial with Joséphine was not his final wish.
• At the time of the repatriation of the remains, it also seems reunification with Joséphine was not on the radar. That event was all about Napoléon as a symbol of French nationalism. The French wikipedia article lists some of the burial places considered: the royal necropolis, the Arc de Triomphe, the momument to Austerlitz, the mausoleom for French national heroes and Pantheon, and a church built as a monument to Napoléon’s army. That article as also quotes the Minister of the Interior, Charles Rémusat, explaining the final choice of the war cemetary as symbolic.
• As for more modern movements, it’s difficult to prove a negative. Google.fr searches for “the remains of Napoléon + Joséphine” [6] or “the remains of Joséphine de Beauharnais” [7] don’t bring up any discussion of this point. 184.147.137.9 (talk) 11:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Don't forget that Joséphine de Beauharnais was the first wife of Napoleon. Moreover, according to WP: He claimed to a friend, while in exile on Saint Helena, that "I truly loved my Joséphine, but I did not respect her.". His second wife was Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma who remarried twice after his death. — AldoSyrt (talk) 12:34, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

@The Emperor's New Spy. According to WP : Napoleon learned of her [Joséphine] death via a French journal while in exile on Elba (not St. Helena). — AldoSyrt (talk) 14:31, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

July 31

Jesus' death on the cross an illusion?

Can someone identify the Muslim verse, Qu'ran or otherwise, that says Jesus death on the cross was an appearance, not a reality? Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 03:19, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

It's in the Docetism article... AnonMoos (talk) 03:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

4:157. - Nunh-huh 03:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 17:01, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Racism of Woodrow Wilson and Wikipedia policy on NPOV

Is it acceptable to mention in the article that Woodrow Wilson was a filthy racist progressive reformer? He segregated federal agencies, believed "Birth of a Nation" was historically accurate, segregated the armed forces, and was a eugenicist. Is it fine to call him that in the article, or does it violate a rule? 108.0.244.168 (talk) 05:39, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The article already has a long section on his views, Woodrow Wilson#Civil Rights, which doesn't seem to pull any punches. Mikenorton (talk) 05:53, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't the word "filthy racist" is used.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:31, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

As opposed to "clean racist"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:00, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The same OP asked about using Wikipedia to castigate Theodore Bilbo as a racist and returns here to ask the same question about Woodrow Wilson. Erecting an on-line Pillory for deceased US politicians makes for a silly agenda when there are so many well qualified serving ones. DreadRed (talk) 10:48, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I doubt there is any "clean" (I mean open) racist national politician in the US. Can you cite any counter-example? OsmanRF34 (talk) 17:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

First off, Wilson did not really segregate the armed forces, as far as I can tell. And a form of eugenics-lite was thoroughly respectable in the U.S. in the 1910s, becoming quite mainstream during the 1920s, so I'm not sure that he went too much beyond widely-held positions of his time in that area (unlike Bilbo, who was far out of the mainstream). Wilson had plenty of negatives without any need to depart from the facts... AnonMoos (talk) 11:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I know that eugenic sterilization was considered acceptable at the time and the KKK tried to use a palatable message to recruit members. Was the incorrect belief that "Birth of a Nation" was historically accurate mainstream among people who were not segregationist Southern Democrats? Was segregating federal organizations since 1863 considered mainstream, or just overlooked? I know that Wilson did not go as far to propose Deportation to Africa like Bilbo. What about his views on Reconstruction, with people like him referring to Northerners as "carpetbaggers"? My question is how should the article be presented? From a modern point of view or one at the time? 108.0.244.168 (talk) 21:03, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The so-called Dunning School was coming in at that time... AnonMoos (talk) 22:43, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

What were the religious demographics of pre-communist China?

--220.255.141.7 (talk) 08:09, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article about Religion in China. Demographic information earlier than 1949 is scarce but there are accounts from a christian perspective by missionaries of the conditions they encountered when promulgating their religion. DreadRed (talk) 10:18, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

A. W. Emerson

On a lot of the illustrations of Nathaniel Bright Emerson's book on Hawaiian mythology I see the name A. W. Emerson, here. Who is A. W. Emerson and is he related to Nathaniel?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Also is Nathaniel's father John S. Emerson who was born in Chester, New Hampshire, of any relation to Ralph Waldo Emerson given they were both from New England and Nathaniel served in the First Regiment of the Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:42, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Some information here "On January 22, 1885, in Honolulu Dr. Emerson married Dr. Sarah E. Pierce, also a physician. One son, Arthur W., was born to the Emersons."--Melburnian (talk) 09:09, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Given John S. Emerson's ancestry here, if he was related to Ralph Waldo Emerson it was distantly, before their respective immigrant ancestors:

John S. Emerson⁵ (John⁴, Samuel³, Jonathan², Michael¹)

Ralph Waldo Emerson⁵ (William⁴, William³, Joseph², Edward¹) - Nunh-huh 22:20, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Sandwich Island Gazette

Where can I find March 4, 1837 issue of the Sandwich Island Gazette?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 09:25, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Libraries that have it. DreadRed (talk) 10:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Ghost gates

In Bangkok there is a neighbourhood known as "Ghost Gate". Its name derives from it being the former location of the city gate designated for the transport of dead bodies out of the city. (It was forbidden for the dead to be brought through other gates.) Ghost gates were found in several historic Tai cities, and were possibly taken after the Ghost Gate (East Gate) in Angkor Thom (although this account makes no mention of the name bearing historical significance). Does/did the practice of designating certain passageways for the dead exist in other cultures? --Paul_012 (talk) 09:48, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

If I understand your query correctly, Ancient Egypt would be a perfect fit, never in human history has so many resources and wealth been expended on what are basically tombs. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 10:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

There was the London Necropolis Railway... AnonMoos (talk) 10:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

See also Lychgate, and note the mention of "lych ways" therein. Deor (talk) 12:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

It's been suggested that the Ness of Brodgar on Orkney was a symbolic passageway into the Ring of Brodgar, which belonged to the dead. Henry^Flower 12:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Corpse road. If you spend much time reading anything on English archaeology, rights of way, or structure of settlements, you end up with frequent (often mysterious) references to funeral roads. 86.164.26.17 (talk) 13:28, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

And for China, Spirit way. 184.147.137.9 (talk) 13:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Iran-Contra hearings

Where were the Iran-Contra (Iran-Contra, not Iran–Contra, anywhere except on Wikipedia) hearings held? Of course I'm sure they were in Washington, D.C., but I'm trying to figure out which government office building(s). 2001:18E8:2:1020:30F4:F313:6D39:FA4 (talk) 14:04, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it was a public televised hearing held at the Congress. OsmanRF34 (talk) 17:47, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Not sure if other venues were added later,, but the hearings began in the Caucus Room of the Russell Senate Office Building and were to alternate between there and the House Judiciary Committee Room in the Rayburn House Office Building, per the first news story that I could find that actually mentioned the venues. (Article in the Milwaukee Journal here.) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 18:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Open slingshot bikinis

There are apparently open slingshot bikinis for women, that include a top, but it is so open that it leaves the breasts fully uncovered. Now I got to thinking, what's the point? The idea of a bikini top is to provide modesty, and support for the breasts. An open slingshot top provides neither. Why not just go topless for that matter? JIP | Talk 15:18, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Could it be used as an actual slingshot? Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:55, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

This is not a matter of modesty but avoiding arrest and prosecution for indecent exposure. Local laws on indecent exposure are probably based on nipple coverage. The coverage provided by the shape and size of any bikini-cut top - or, for that matter, crop-tops, evening gowns, and other outerwear - may expose much of the breast while still covering the nipple. You may compare this phenomenon with the furor in many jurisdictions where breastfeeding in public places is considered unacceptable by community or workplace standards. -- Deborahjay (talk) 16:13, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

But my point is, I have seen images of bikini tops that are so open that they indeed do not even cover the nipples. JIP | Talk 16:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The point of such bikinis is to provide sexual titillation and arousement... modesty and/or support is distinctly not the point. Blueboar (talk) 16:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

But then, why bother with a top at all? JIP | Talk 17:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Because being partially/minimally covered is often considered more arousing than outright nakedness. Blueboar (talk) 23:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Because a little color and fabric here and there can accentuate natural curves and just add to the overall aesthetic. Dismas|^(talk) 06:39, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Have you read the article "Monokini"? Gabbe (talk) 10:45, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Who chooses the news?

What is the process of choosing what news hit the front page? I wonder if there aren't lots of Zimmerman's cases or Marte's cases out there; but the press makes them special. Is there an invisible hand out there filtering news? OsmanRF34 (talk) 17:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Different newspapers or news outlets all have different processes for choosing what goes on their front page. The question is too vague to be answered. Did you have a specific news outlet in mind? Those who notice an invisible hand filtering news from one news outlet, can easily find one of several alternative news outlets that may be filtered by someone else - in about 300 different languages around the world. The idea of a global monopoly on all information is disproven every day by the existence of Web 2.0, but is often dreamed of by people who read pulp fiction. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 18:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

So, why do cases like Zimmerman or Marte Dalelv get reported by many of the news outlets in 300 languages? Isn't it perfectly possible that their back-end news agencies (like Reuters) are the ones in charge of what gets considered remarkable? Note: I have no doubt that the two cases that I cited above are something awful, but so are the other thousands of murders that happen. I get the impression we are living in a Matrix~made by humans. OsmanRF34 (talk) 18:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

This can be a problem when you have several news outlets controlled by the same interests. Yellow journalism is often considered a major cause of the 1898 Spanish-American War. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 18:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Remember, Communist countries like China or the former Soviet Union have a reputation for some of the most tightly controlled information outlets. I don't know if the Zimmerman case got reported at all in China, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did, because 1) when something is so prominent as to grip the US media for so many days, it becomes a more likely candidate as a global story and harder to ignore altogether, and 2) a case like that could easily be spun into the sort of highly negative view of the US that characterizes the "Little Red Book", that is still an official Chinese philosophy if I'm not mistaken. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 07:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

China is still officially Communist in a way, but the Little Red Book is strongly associated with the Cultural Revolution period, which is currently regarded with embarrassment. Anyway, Xinhua and several other PRC news sources are accessible online... AnonMoos (talk) 18:16, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:In the news and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom and https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Newsroom.

—Wavelength (talk) 18:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Look up "institutional analysis, media". See also agenda-setting theory. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 18:32, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

This reminds me of the scene in The Odd Couple (the classic 1968 movie) where Gwendolyn (or maybe Cecily) is just getting to know Felix (Jack Lemmon) and asks him what he does. He tells her he writes news stories for television. She then asks him "Where do you get your ideas from?", which leaves him momentarily lost for words. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:28, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

See Deciding whether news is in the public interest.

—Wavelength (talk) 21:22, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Search on the World Wide Web for news media control.

—Wavelength (talk) 23:03, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

The best thing I've read on this is Deciding what's news by Herbert Gans. It gives lots of examples, and there is no one answer. One example that I remember is that, for a sports story to make the front page of eg. Time magazine, they check whether it appeals to journalists who are known not to care about sport much. If it appeals to them, it's counted as more significant. Generally, editors play a strong role, but Rupert Murdoch is famous for a more hands-on approach. You might also be interested in reading Edward Jay Epstein's News from Nowhere, not to be confused with the science-fiction book of the same name. It isn't as substantial as Gans' book, and focuses on a particular theme that gets hammered throughout. In Epstein's view, the news is basically a kind of production line, driven by efficiency rather than quality. In answer to your question about specific cases, some of them catch the public imagination. Journalists do spend a lot of time reading other newspapers and so on, and many stories get going this way. No one wants to be left out, eg. by thinking this Edward Snowden thing might turn out to be a beat-up. No one can afford to be left out of a "watercooler" topic. IBE (talk) 04:32, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

It should always be remembered that the primary aim of a newspaper is to sell advertising so that its proprietor makes money. News items will be chosen to satisfy the same demographic(s) that the paper's advertising is aimed at. Hailing as I do from the same city as one Rupert Murdoch, I cannot also ignore the "suggestion" that newspaper proprietors sometimes go out of their way to influence political views among their readers, sometimes for commercial and sometimes for personal, idealistic reasons. HiLo48 (talk) 08:03, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Balloon Boy may answer some questions. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:54, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Name the young adult sci-fi series!

Hi. I remember reading some books when I was quite young, around 1986 or so, but I can't remember the author or any titles, and can't work out any useful terms to google. I can, however, describe the plot and setting, and maybe somebody else also remembers them.

A prison-spaceship from Earth (I think) crash-lands on a planet somewhere, and most of the cargo of prisoners in suspended animation do not survive the crash. The book follows one survivor as he finds ways to live on this new world. At some point, he meets up with another survivor, this one female, and there's a third survivor who serves as an antagonist.

That's really all I remember. There were at least three novels, I think, in this series. Does anyone have any idea? Thanks in advance. -GTBacchus^(talk) 20:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Could it be Hard Crash [8] or Prophet's Power [9] , based on the Unreal game? It's from the late '90s and there seems to be only two books, though. Sjö (talk) 12:06, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I definitely read these during the Reagan years, so no. :/ -GTBacchus^(talk) 00:42, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Likely to be Exiles of Colsec? [10] Thom2002 (talk) 20:09, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

PS The two sequels were The Caves of Klydor (1984) and Colsec Rebellion (1985). The author was Canadian Douglas Hill. A plot summary of the first book matching your description can be found here: [11] Thom2002 (talk) 20:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

August 1

Political "strenght" of incumbent US presidents

By studying the American political history I soon found out, that there have been four persons who succeeded the presidency (succession from the office of Vice President) in the 19th century. Presidential succession also occured five times during the 20th century. All four Presidents of the 19th century only completed the remaining term and have even not been nominated for reelection. In the 20th century all five presidents were nominated for reelection and won the general-election except of one (Gerald Ford in 1976). That indicates that the political position of an incumbent president in the 19th century was much weaker, especially those who assumend the office rather than beeing elected to it (Franklin Pierce was the only elected president not nominated for a second term in 1856). Except of Gerald Ford, who struggled with Ronald Reagan in a hard fought primary election, all accidential presidents of the 20th century easlily clinched their party nominations (Theodore Roosevelt in 1904, Calvin Coolidge in 1924, Harry S. Truman in 1948 and Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964). Is my presumption correct? What are the reasons for this? --84.160.181.149 (talk) 08:43, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I think there are many answers to this, however the very first example of what you mention (John Tyler) was disrespected by even his subordinates, and those in Congress and elsewhere by never calling him Mr. President but Interim-President and Temporary President etc. This may also have much to do with the more modern reverence for the office of the President. Aside from a few exceptions most 19th century Americans considered the Speaker of the House the leader or co-leader of the nation with such statesmen as Henry Clay and in a general Congress case Daniel Webster, being revered in their times to a much greater extent than the "Executive". In many ways the view of the Speaker of the House being the leader of the nation isn't as strange as it may seem since the Prime Minister form of government in other nations is basically having the person elected to lead the lower house be the leader of the nation as well, and it could be argued that the Speaker of the House is actually the most directly elected democratic leader, especially in the 19th century when Senators were chosen by state assemblies and the overruled the popular vote with the 1828 and 1876 results.

Many historians admit that in today's 24/7 visual media atmosphere people like Abraham Lincoln etc. would not be "pop-culture" enough to get elected and by the 1960s we had candidates like Richard Nixon winning the same debate on radio but losing it on TV, forward the 1968 claim of Laugh-In that they got Nixon elected with his "Sock it to me?" piece, Reagan as a movie actor, Bill Clinton on Arsenio Hall with the Sax and Obama doing late night and you have a kind of cultural pedestal for the Presidency that did not exist in the 19th century. Without the pomp and ceremony, the photo ops of the big plane and house, and ability to be in everyones living rooms with an oval office address the stature of a President compared to a Speaker or President Pro Temp is leveled.

And of course you have the dynamic that wasn't present in the 19th century, the so-called James Cox excuse that Harding had the rugged good looks/voice in both the first election (1920) to be carried over the radio and allowing women to vote. Any political consultant will admit that looking good to an electorate that comprises 53% of the population & though just as intelligent & qualified as men also tend to make snap judgments based more on appearance and likability, has led to the necessary glamorization of the presidency and thus how in some ways it has drifted to a rock star/sports star like persona which when compared to other branches of the government gives an instant impression that the others are somehow less in ways.

With these more modern developments in mind a party & its donors have more incentives to prop up & stick with an "accidental president" with renomination & showing respect. Not only were these not present in the 19th century but for the above reasons there were incentives to abandon an accidental president that don't exist much anymore. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 09:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Also worth noting is that, in the post Civil War period, from Andrew Johnson through William McKinley, is largely considered the period of the "do-nothing" Presidents. It wasn't merely that people didn't trust incumbents, it is that the office of President wasn't a major political force in America and many of the 19th century Presidents were political weaklings who exerted very little political will. The idea of an activist president who used the office to push through legislation and exert political power both within the U.S. and abroad was certainly Theodore Roosevelt. There's a very good reason he's on Mount Rushmore as one of the four greatest Presidents; he revolutionized the office and literally invented the modern Presidency. --Jayron32 01:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Royal accession of twins

If twins are born, what is their order of succession to the throne, particularly British?--93.174.25.12 (talk) 10:08, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Shot in the dark here but aren't even non-royal twins sequenced by order of birth, one twin is always the oldest and one always the youngest. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 10:19, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Disregarding genders, the first born, literally the first one out. The fact that the children could be minutes apart instead of the usual years makes no difference. However, to my knowledge this question has never been put to the test in recorded history. That is, there has possibly never been an accession to a throne while the acceding royal had a living twin, and definitely not in britain. This is likely because until recent times, infant mortality rates were quite high, and were even higher than normal if the infant was from a multiple birth. Adult twins period were extremely rare until recently, let alone royal twins with a good chance of inheriting a throne. Similar questions have been asked before, see: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2011_April_27#Ruling_monarchs_with_twin_siblings, Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2008_November_20#Twins_as_heir_to_a_throne, and, while you're at it, List_of_twins#Twins_in_royal_families. Someguy1221 (talk) 10:26, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Isn't the second twin immediately put in an iron mask? μηδείς (talk) 15:23, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

No, the first one. That way you have a better story: "retake the throne from the evil usurper twin, rescue the innocent good prince"! --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I have been told (no handy source, alas) that twins in France are considered differently: the one that's first born is the younger, on the "first in, last out" principle, as if the uterus were akin to an elevator. (But primogeniture is not so important under the Napoleonic Code.) As to the assertion that royal twins are unknown "in recorded history", I give you these, from 2010:

Heart-warming news for all legitimists and those who cherish the heritage of Christian Europe. The Duchess of Anjou, Princess Marie-Marguerite of France, wife of the Duke of Anjou – Louis XX, de jure King of France and Navarre – gave birth on Friday 28 May to twin sons. Prince Louis, the elder (by five minutes), is the 34th Dauphin of Viennois and Duc de Bourgogne; the younger, Prince Alphonse, is the Duc de Berry.

I wouldn't trust The Telegraph to get the elder part right, necessarily. Source: BrainyBabe (talk) 17:31, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh, but that doesn't invalidate my statement :D. You see, I specifically stated that such a twin acceding while his brother was alive, is what has not been tested. It's possible I'm still wrong, and if I am, I would love to be proven as much. Someguy1221 (talk) 18:33, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

de jure? Yeah, right. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

@Someguy1221 I don't think that is the case. Maybe not in Britain but there must have been a known case on the continent maybe in the thousands of German principalities. And the Duke of Anjou's children don't count because the throne of France is defunct and all the elder twin would be acceding to is a pretendership.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 22:10, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

The story of Perez and Zerah in the book of Genesis is more peculiar than anything that you're likely to encounter in a historical royal family... AnonMoos (talk) 18:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

It doesnt answer your question but Procles and Eurysthenes were twins and their birth gave rise to the double kingship in Sparta. Also check out Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2013 July 12#Co-Monarchs who were twins or triplets.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 23:25, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

SEGxi?

Abbreviation of which book? --132.64.31.27 (talk) 10:20, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to wikipedia, you have found the Reference Desk for humanities and as you probably read above we cover a wide and diverse area of topics here within the social sciences. Leaving a cryptic acronym that matches no wikipedia searches doesn't enlighten any of us on what exactly your asking. Please give a few more details such as what book your speaking of or where Wikipedia references this. Thanks. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 10:27, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

This is entirely a wild guess, but I wonder if it could refer to Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum - that is, the eleventh (XI) issue of this publication, which our article suggests was published between 1923 and 1950. Our article does indeed use the SEG abbreviation. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 10:45, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. There is some more information here. This suggests it was published in 1954. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:55, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Jadoo Ghar

I am hoping to clear up a minor bit of confusion at our Masonic Temple (Lahore) article, and need some help finding sources. The confusion is over the term "Jadoo Gar" and which building(s) it applies to. The article discusses Rudyard Kipling's novel Kim .. which mentions the lodge's building and how it is called the "Jadoo Gar" (or "Magic House"). Given the time that Kim is set, I assume Kipling is referring to the lodge's original building (occupied by the Lodge prior to 1914, then demolished). However our article also uses the term when talking about lodge's second building (constructed in 1914, and now owned by the Pakistani Government). It is certainly possible that the term has been applied to both buildings... but I need some sources to clarify and confirm this. Any suggestions would help.Blueboar (talk) 14:16, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Best I can find is a reference to another Masonic hall (in Kharagpur, West Bengal) also being called a ‘’jadu bari’’ (magic house). [12] By retired railway worker Abdel Ahmed, telling historian Laura Bear about the history of the town. The conversation was held between 1993 and 1997. Of course, it’d be extrapolation to guess this is/was a common name for masonic lodges generally. Everything else I can find online refers to ‘’Kim’’. English may not be the right language to search in. What about WikiProject India? They are a helpful bunch. 184.147.137.9 (talk) 19:43, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

US states changing capitals

I was interested to hear there have been discussions about changing Alaska's capital from Juneau. Has a US state changed its capital before? --BDD (talk) 16:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Many have - some more than once. Michigan changed from Detroit to Lansing. Illinois changed twice from Kaskaskia, Illinois to Vandalia, Illinois to Springfield, Illinois. Rmhermen (talk) 16:33, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I found this: List_of_capitals_in_the_United_States#Historical_state_capitals Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 16:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

From that list it looks like the last time a state changed its capital was 1910 (OK). Rmhermen (talk) 16:39, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Strange — one of those factoids in my head was that the capital of California used to be Auburn. No mention of that in the list above nor in the Auburn article. Quick web search confirms I'm not the only one who thought that. Anyone know why this would have become a common idea? --Trovatore (talk) 16:46, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Was it the Republic of California? ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 18:37, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Per our article, the Bear Flag Republic was proclaimed in Sonoma. As it never exercised effective authority, I'm not sure they ever really had a capital, but that doesn't mean they didn't proclaim one. If they had done so, though, it would have seemed odd to pick Auburn, so far away across the Central Valley. --Trovatore (talk) 18:45, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

They have been discussing moving from Juneau almost since Alaska became a state. The legislature even budgeted for it a couple times. If memory serves Wasilla and Deer Creek have been candidates. The will to do it seems to drift away each time and one of many reasons is that other parts of the state resist the capital being too close to Anchorage as it controls too much of what goes in in the state already. MarnetteD | Talk 06:04, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Astrology and new planets

A question about astrology on the Science ref desk got me wondering about how new discoveries were incorporated in the astrological belief system. Astrology predates the discoveries of Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, Ceres and possibly other celestial bodies that now have significance in astrology. How did astrologers arrive at the conclusion about how the new planet influences the world? It would be pretty silly if they couldn't agree on whether Neptune stand for strenght or serenity, so how did they come to the astrologic consensus (if there is such a thing)? Are there some principles that can be uses to deduce the significance of a newly discovered planet, like you can predict the properties of new chemical compounds? Did they discuss before reaching a conclusion? Or did someone just make a statement and the other astrologers said "OK, that will do, I'll go with that"? Sjö (talk) 16:22, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Did you see Planets_in_astrology#Modern_planets? Apparently it's all to do with what's going on in the (Western) world at the time the planet is discovered. So Uranus (1781) is connected to invention, new ideas, genius, as it coincided with the Enlightenment, Neptune (1846) is the rise of Socialism and the working classes, and Pluto (1930) the rise of Fascism and Stalinism, and Nuclear energy. You couldn't make it up, could you? (Oh that's right, they did). Rojomoke (talk) 16:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

"Uranus the Magician" and "Neptune the Mystic" were incorporated into Gustav Holst's The Planets. Anyway, the outer planets move rather slowly against the background of the stars -- it would be possible to grow to adulthood with Pluto in the same astrological sign your whole life... AnonMoos (talk) 17:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but how did they decide that what happened in the world at the time was the important thing? You might as well have looked at the constellation it was discovered in or the abilities of people born when its supposed influence was strongest. And how did word get around that Uranus is connected to invention etc. ? Sjö (talk) 05:39, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

The word got around the same way most other fringe ideas get around... whoever comes up with the idea includes it a book, a book which is primarily read by other fringe proponents. If these other fringe proponents like the idea, they incorporate the idea into their books... and so on... until the new idea is considered "cannon" among believers of the Fringe theory in question. (And if some of the other fringe proponents don't like the idea... the Fringe community splits into rival factions, who then spend many happy years debating how much WEIGHT to give it on Wikipedia.) Blueboar (talk) 14:31, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Astrology is, or at least was, closely tied with religion. Religion has also been known to suffer schisms from time to time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:09, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Say what now? What religion do you have in mind? The Abrahamic religions, at least, generally condemn astrology, the story of the Magi notwithstanding. --Trovatore (talk) 21:10, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Although they took astrology fairly casually at that time. In any case, you may find this item of interest.[13] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:26, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

• I have an early-1930s astrological almanac somewhere which refers to Pluto. I was impressed by how quickly they incorporated it, and how quickly it was treated as "normal" - despite the discovery only being a few years old, there was no sense that it was a new or unusual thing to be referring to. Andrew Gray (talk) 18:19, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Much the same happened with the bigger asteroids during the 19th-Century, although when it was realized how many of them there actually were, they were (by-and-large) quickly dropped. Just looking at The Student's Assistant in Astronomy and Astrology an astrology text book from 1836 where the author discusses the inclusion of the big four (Ceres, Vesta, Pallas and Juno) as well as Uranus (going under the name Herschel). I'm still looking for the definitive astrological interpretation of the influences of Larry, Curly and Moe. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:57, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

:I wonder if it works in reverse - picture it, an astrologic plan for world peace! We just try to get everyone on the world to agree that Mars doesn't actually exist, and its influence goes away. :) We add a few epicycles to our gravity scheme, write off Curiosity as a studio hoax, and good to go. :) Wnt (talk) 01:27, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if Pluto had never been given the status of "planet" to begin with, whether the astrological fraternity would ever have bothered to incorporate it into their thing. They certainly haven't made any sort of special fuss about Juno, Ceres etc, which are of no less astronomical interest. I think it's clear whom we can blame here: scientists, for taking 80 years to get their plutonic nomenclature shit together, taxonomically speaking. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:39, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Actually there are some modern astrologers who incorporate many of the minor planets into their system, and their work makes fascinating reading. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:37, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

The problem of new planets was brought up in Mostly Harmless]], by Douglas Adams. The problem is then turned on its head when aliens ask what it means for them to be born when Earth is in Virgo, etc. Matt Deres (talk) 04:00, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Question about buying/selling stock

After the initial IPO, and all the shared as sold, if you (as an individual) buy a stock or sell a stock, who are you buying or selling it to? The company or other people? I was under the impression that a company never has to repay anyone for the money they get from offering stock, but my mom was under the impression that when you sell a stock, you are selling it back to the company. ScienceApe (talk) 16:35, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

A stockbroker acts as an intermediary, matching buyers with sellers, usually through a stock exchange. Those articles should explain it all. Rojomoke (talk) 16:48, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

That's what I thought, so then why is it that when a lot of people sell their stock, the stock price goes down? If they are all selling to other buyers, shouldn't it remain the same? ScienceApe (talk) 19:19, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

The very simple version is whether, on balance, buy orders or sell orders are being filled. In a selling market, buyers have a surplus of options and so fill orders (buying a seller's stock) at slightly lower prices. In a buying market, sellers have a surplus of options and so fill orders (selling to a prospective buyer) at slightly higher prices. — Lomn 19:27, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

First your question about the "company" or "other people" is yes and yes and also brokerage firms will "make a market" in stocks and buy and sell them not necessarily to profit but to "build inventory" as it were (similar to how Wal-Mart may "stock up" on seasonal items to sell later), there are also large institutions (pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds) that though they trade through brokers kind of exist in their own force field financially.

Second, stocks aren't all that complicated, prices go where the the law of supply and demand takes them. If you watch closely your local super market will have 50% off or buy 2 get one free "sales", in actuality the supplier or the store itself guessed wrong on the "market" for beans or soda and now is getting "stuck" with all that inventory so the selling will commence! It's not the store being a great neighbor it is simple supply and demand. The store guesses right too, stocking up heavy on items that actually do spike in "demand" and the store actually raises prices on it. Stocks are like anything else, a classic example of this law of economics that also shows the stock component is the middle of the Hudsucker Proxy where the "dingus" is marked down, down, down, until its "get one free with every store purchase" & then thrown out to the curb, whereupon its an instant hit and you see the store owner rip the stickers off in reverse, increasing the price each time until he places a new sticker doubling or tripling the price where the camera instantly switches to headquarters and we see Jennifer Jason Leigh reading the stock ticker with enthusiasm. It really is that simple, supply and demand. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 20:19, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Or as it says on my userspace, Gordon Gekko sums it up pretty nicely: "It's a zero sum game, sport. Somebody wins & somebody loses. Money itself isn't lost or made, it's simply transferred from one perception to another. Like magic. That painting cost $60,000 10 years ago. I could sell it today for $600,000. The illusion has become real & the more real it becomes, the more desperately they want it. Capitalism at its finest." ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 20:26, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the easy to understand response. One more question, since the company that is offering the stock makes all their money in the IPO once all the shares are sold, why do they care about attracting more buyers later on? It seems like every company encourages everyone to buy their stock, but what do they care if they already got all the money they wanted to raise from the IPO? ScienceApe (talk) 21:30, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

You can have an IPO for just 30% of the "shares" and many companies do just that or something like it. So the company account with millions or tens of millions of shares of the month old IPO is very much impacted by where that 30% or so of the "publicly held" shares go in price. Even in companies where 80-90% of shares are open to the public the vast majority of total compensation for CEOs and directors are through "stock options" and they already have large chunks of shares from years ago. Mark Zuckerberg of course wants Facebook stock to go way up in price, he literally has all his money in the stock even though the "company" doesn't any longer. Major corporations can also get more favorable loan and credit lines with money center banks using their vaulted stock values as a form of collateral. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 21:40, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Also some companies or corporate leaders actually do "short" their stock and either don't care if it goes down or actively seeks it to go down. The Hudsucker Proxy has a case of that led by Paul Newman's character and back to Gordon Gekko exposing Teldar Paper's leadership of that in his "Greed is Good" speech: "in the days of the free market when our country was a top industrial power, there was accountability to the stockholder. The Carnegies, the Mellons, the men that built this great industrial empire, made sure of it because it was their money at stake. Today, management has no stake in the company! All together, these men sitting up here own less than three percent of the company. And where does Mr. Cromwell put his million-dollar salary? Not in Teldar stock; he owns less than one percent. You own the company. That's right, you, the stockholder. And you are all being royally screwed over by these, these bureaucrats . . ." If you watch those two films with these stock questions in mind you will actually see very visual answers you can use. Real world examples of when companies might actually push down their stock price is when they seek to take their shares private, a reverse IPO of sorts like Heinz recently did thou that isn't the best example or times when they try to make themselves more attractive to a merger partner or buyout. Big caveat though is that stock manipulation up or down is very illegal, however as Hudsucker Proxy illustrates and Gekko with his "I'll dilute the s.o.b." line states there are legal ways to make yourself "unattractive" to stock buyers. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 21:54, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Senior management's bonusses may be connected to the stock price, giving them a good incentive to try to keep the share price high even after the IPO. And they may want to create/sell more shares in the future to raise more money, so high prices help. Keeping prices high requires demand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unilynx (talk • contribs) 22:19, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

ScienceApe's mother's impression, that when you sell stock you are selling it back to the company, may derive from her experience with mutual funds, which do buy their shares back from shareholders. John M Baker (talk) 17:02, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

• One of the things the OP seems to be confusing is that, for all intents and purposes, the people who own shares in the company are the company. That's how publicly traded companies work. If you own 1000 shares of company X, and there are 1,000,000 shares of company X in the world, you are a 0.1% owner of company X. The company has an interest in seeing the share price go up because the owners of the company have an interest in seeing share price go up. It is that simple. The Wikipedia article Shareholder value explores this model of corporate finance and management. --Jayron32 01:05, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Reform Kibbutz and conservative kibbutz

How many kibbutzim are reform Jewish and how many are conservative? -- 17:47, 1 August 2013‎ 70.54.65.213

70.54.65.213 (talk · contribs) Donmust90 (talk · contribs)

Donmust90 -- You've asked that basic question several times before, and you've received partial answers, and been told that the question in the form in which you asked it contains incorrect assumptions which prevents it from being answered in the way you apparently want it answered. What's the point of asking this again now?? AnonMoos (talk) 18:09, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Synopsis for those just tuning in: In the history of the kibbutz movement in Israel, there have been a few (= fingers of one hand) kibbutzim affiliated with Reform and Conservative Judaism, which are streams located in the United States and other Diaspora countries. Kibbutzim of the Category:Religious Kibbutz Movement follow Halakha practice and observance, e.g. Kashruth. Religious practices on the others, the majority of kibbutzim, are traditions developed in the TaKaM (Hebrew acronym for the former United Kibbutz Movement; labor Zionist) and Ha-Kibbutz ha-Artzi (socialist Zionist), that now comprise the Kibbutz Movement. The kibbutzim of the former are more traditional (e.g., perhaps not serving dairy and meat at the same meal), those of the latter less so (e.g. serving pork during the fast of Yom Kippur). -- Deborahjay (talk) 17:49, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2

Archaeology and indigenous rights

What is the degree of indigenous legal protection for native artifacts/ancient remains inhibiting archaeologists in the United States (the mainland, Hawaii and Alaska)? I know in Hawaii it is basically impossible to touch any native sites without indigenous activists calling you a grave robber for example the Forbes cave controversy. And on the mainland, tribes often claim ancient remains found by archaeologists as members of their tribes and try to have them reburied. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:03, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

See Kennewick Man, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act... AnonMoos (talk) 04:38, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

If you have access to American Antiquity, try reading this article from 1995 — someone stole artifacts from the Mount Vernon Site in far southwestern Indiana, took them into Kentucky, and was prosecuted under NAGPRA (per Anonmoos) for crossing state lines with stolen prehistoric artifacts. General Electric, the property owner, basically stiffed everyone by dumping the recovered artifacts in a hole in the ground in order to satisfy legal requirements; the archaeologists were deeply disappointed/displeased (Mount Vernon is one of the largest Hopewell mounds ever found), and I think that the tribe they consulted (which of course can't be determined to be descendents of people from 3000 years ago) was rather unhappy about the process too. Nyttend (talk) 16:55, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Maya Angelou quote

I believe this question fits in this section, but if not feel free to move it.

A hopefully simple request: I have found a quote by Maya Angelou: "Segregation shaped me; education liberated me." Can someone help me find out the year she had written/said this quotation? The site I read it did not say, and I have looked online with no success.

Thanks! 64.229.155.218 (talk) 06:34, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

According to this book, she said it to Henry Louis Gates Jr. in interviews for the book. The book was published in 2009 but apparently is based on 2006 and 2008 TV series. 184.147.137.9 (talk) 11:28, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Models of Landseer's lions

This page on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lions_of_trafalgar_Square._Could_these_models_be_Landseer_proofs..JPG) is the only reference I can find on the internet to the existence of these model lions in bronze thought to be cast from clay proofs submitted by Landseer for approval to the Ministry of Works Committee. I am very interested to find out more about them: where they are, whether they are on public display, who they belong to etc. We are interested in including them in an exhibition. Any help will be very gratefully received. Roger959 (talk) 10:25, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

See File talk:Lions of trafalgar Square. Could these models be Landseer proofs..JPG. I don't think we are likely to have any information other than the comments the uploader of that file made; they were his only two edits to the site. You could always try emailing him. Andrew Gray (talk) 18:31, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Although there are Victorian replicas of the Trafalgar Square lions, such as A VICTORIAN BRONZE MODEL OF A RECUMBENT LION AFTER LANDSEER, CIRCA 1880. Alansplodge (talk) 21:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

August 3

70s or 80s made for tv debate forum

It was sponsored by a university if I remember correctly but not Ivy League or the Stanfords of the world. It was on local PBS stations about a decade ago but even then they were reruns. About an hour long and they had a large room with almost stadium like seating but low ceilings and wood paneling circling the center where "experts" from the law professions, corporations, retired CEOs, noted journalists etc. sat at a circular table as a moderator went around and sort of stirred the pot. The episodes I remember was something about crime prevention and then another about corporate ethics where they had some memorable exchanges about an inventor founding a company and then investors and "wall street" kind of moving in and taking it over and even pushing the founder out. The room was lit in a dark way sort of like inverted wall lamps and had a 70s or early 80s feel to it. Any one remember this series? ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 04:40, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Might be Firing Line RudolfRed (talk) 04:57, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks RudolfRed, I am familiar with Buckley so I would have recognized him. The show I am thinking about showed the audience it was in a bowl seating type thing and the moderator actually walked around this crsecent moon shaped wood paneled table, I think even Rudy Guilianni was there and listed as US Attorney for S.D. NY so had to be late 80s or so. The moderator was not Geraldo Rivera or Phil Donahue but kind of had the mannerisms of them walking constantly from area to area switching the debate up, looking down in pensive thought, sitting on the table in front of guests occassionally but no big microphone. Almost certain he was a professor or aligned with a university so that rules out Buckley and Firing Line unless it was a guest host at a college lecture hall type series for 3-4 episodes. I keep visualizing the dark wood paneling as the border between the audience and guests or perhaps the structure of the crescent moon table they were sitting at and the audience seating was dark wood/brown dimly lit. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 07:39, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

This sounds a little like the TV pilot series for The Moral Maze that we had in the UK. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:33, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

The BBC made a series very like this called 'Hypotheticals' in the 1990s - the basis being that the people on the panel all had experience of real life situations which they couldn't disclose in public, but if they were given a hypothetical situation they could demonstrate how they would make their decisions. Sam Blacketer (talk) 10:50, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Been doing a bit of digging and I think this New York Times article is what you're thinking about. If so then the format was developed as a generic one and used for various shows. Sam Blacketer (talk) 10:58, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

That article is it Sam Blacketer! Fred Friendly's series thats what I'm thinking of though I can't seem to find the specific 80s one I had in mind I did pull up a list of them and I'm pretty sure this is the right track, seems a lot of them are still purchase only. Kudos to you, and a big thanks! ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 11:35, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Identifying science fiction novel

I read a novel somewhere around 1980. Its protagonist was an ordinary human who because of a mix-up won a lottery where the prize was a journey through other dimensions. An important plot point is that because of the dangers in your own world, to keep the balance of things a new danger is created especially for you when you travel to another dimension. I think that was called an X-eater (with X as the protagonist's name) and was mostly somewhat humanoid in appearance. The protagonist travels through several dimensions, leaving each one when the X-eater gets too close. Somewhere he picks up a travel companion, a female. At the end of the book it's strongly hinted that he returns to his own dimension, but he keeps on travelling.

There's a scene at the beginning of the book when the lottery representative has come to present the prize and the real winner appears. At first he is very angry and intends to take the prize but then he changes his mind, apparently amused by the thought of having a human meet the dangers of interdimensional travel. It is shown that the real winner is more powerful than humans are; I think there was something about lead dripping from his fingertips as he became angry. Sjö (talk) 08:24, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I haven't read it (or even heard of it until now), but your description sounds a lot like Dimension of Miracles by the inimitable Robert Sheckley. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:37, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Yep, that must be the one. Thanks! Sjö (talk) 10:09, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Detroit bankrupty --> Chapter 9 bankruptcies in general - Can anybody here help?

Hello, I posted a question at an article's talk page's section (please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chapter_9,_Title_11,_United_States_Code#Notable_Bankruptcies ) (but neither get an answer there, nor later at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_United_States#Can_anybody_here_help.3F , nor again later at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal_talk:United_States#Detroit_bankrupty_--.3E_Chapter_9_bankruptcies_in_general ). So I really hope that someone here finally could help me in finding out the names and data of the 600+ Chapter9bankruptcy-cases and so on. That would be nice, as I want to know it plus I really feel for that it's just a basic information missing from the (tabulary/list of the) Chapter9bankruptcies-article (how can the article contain the number 600+, if it is not able to give a source that not only mentions that number just by suggesting it but by really sourcing that suggestion by identifying that 600+ entries?). Thank you.46.142.39.141 (talk) 13:35, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Google scholar "legal" for the term chapter 9 bankruptcy here will answer most of this for you. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 14:26, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

That's interesting, but as there are only 82 hits and because of about half of them seem to consider companies, hospital associations, school districts, etc., it seems to me they're only about 40 city/community-chapter9-bankruptcy cases - and some of them are even on the "selected list" of the chapter9-wiki-article yet; so even if both combined, I think there still are more than 500 unidentified cases. Maybe all the data is not yet in the net? As I wrote in the article's talk page, I wonder whether there isn't some sort of a federal department section that collects/records such data and could provide us just with a list of them? As I'm not from the U.S., I'm not so into it to guess which section or who is best to ask, so I thought someone of you could have a clue about that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.142.39.141 (talk) 18:26, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes I see that now with the 82, the only thing that rivals Google scholar really is the Cornell Law school online library, if you don't mind paying some there is always WestLaw and you can go to the source I think for free to search of the U.S. Government's online court records but you will have to give a credit card to view cases and after so many views (a handful or something?) they will start charging you per page I think. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 19:39, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong here but I thought when the article mentioned 600+ they meant all chapter 9's, including "authorities" or companies as you refer to them, hospital associations, school districts, etc. since all of these are technically government entities for the purposes of bankruptcy law. I don't think there has been 600+ citys/counties/towns that have declared. Part of the reason governments create authorities, school districts, hospital associations etc. is that they can raise their own bonds and be pretty much financially independent in that if Detroit goes bankrupt, its hospitals, schools and airport etc. don't and vice versa. Pittsburgh had a situation about a decade ago where an airline de-hubbed its airport and thus cut landing fees and passenger fee revenue by a ton so the airport was actually close to defaulting on its bonds and bankruptcy was considered for a time but since the airport was an "independent" authority it would not effect the city or schools or health department etc. It is quite common in the U.S. to have this kind of set up since the 1960's, the World Trade Centers in New York in the late 1960s were built with one of the first independent authorities to exist that was set up by New York state and New Jersey. Long story short a lot of these "chapter 9"s I had taken as the water authority or school district or regional county trash authority or transit authority etc. There are many famous cases of small and large cities going belly up but in 200 some years I seriously doubt there's anything approaching 600, but again I could be wrong about if that number only represents cities. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 19:49, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

This is really easy: [14]. As for the actual list, it might be harder but it's not super difficult. AFAIK Westlaw and Lexis are not the best places to find this kind of statistical data, but maybe they have some product I'm unaware of. But the aggregate data is easy to find. Shadowjams (talk) 21:24, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

There have been 59 Chapter 9 filings since 2008, btw. Shadowjams (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Are Americans allowed to eat their own food? Are raw foods available?

Hi,

I'm writing from Europe. I read this article via an internet link:

http://www.psmag.com/health/a-fatter-phobia-8549/

I don't understand some of it. For example, where the writer talks about the McDonald's and the sit-down restaurant. A couple of questions:

1 - Why does the author say the sit-down restaurant will have more Calories than McDonald's? Do American restaurants typically not have soups, salads, steaks, vegetables, etc etc. Every single menu item would be similar to mcdonald's?

2 - Do Americans not have a choice to eat their own food? I don't really understand this at all. I can go to a store here and buy whatever ingredients I want and cook whatever I want. If I wanted to eat almost no calories (which I don't recommend) I would just put vegetables in soup, or eat it with a salad with olives. That is one extreme, in between that and something very unhealthy (eating a whole batch of cookies) I can cook whatever I want. This doesn't seem to be an option in the article. Why is this?

3 - the article says "individuals ... believed that body weight was 'controllable' (meaning that, with discipline and time, a person can lose excess fat)".

This seems to me very bizarre. It seems completely obvious to me that I, and anyone, can control their body weight by changing the amounts of food eaten.

But the article seems to talk about this as though it's a false belief. The only way I can think of for this is if Americans do not have much choice in what they eat.

Is this true? How can it be?

I find the article very hard to understand. 178.48.114.143 (talk) 13:52, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

It says at the top "You’re at the office, on a budget, it’s almost lunch time and — you’re starving." so only 1/2 hour or maybe hour which really only gives you 10-30 min to eat, its not that Americans can't cook or buy things from the store its that theres a reason America invented fast food, that reason of a quick in & out is the article's subject. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 14:18, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

But why are you at the office without food, in this example, if a McDonald's will be the only option within your distance? Can't Americans buy food ahead of time? 178.48.114.143 (talk) 16:36, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

American eating habits are often a source of culture shock. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 16:46, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Is it true at all that Americans are fatter than Europeans? Or is it a myth? And a further question. Why would be fast food be a calorie bomb or unhealthy? You could go to something fast, like a salad bar-type of restaurant. 95.20.116.138 (talk) 17:30, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Of course there are plenty of US restaurants offering healthier 'fast food', but the bombardment of advertising from the big chains may make it seem otherwise... Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 17:52, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

The article is clearly about those who eat certain foods from certain restaurants, if you re-read your title to this question it's pretty outlandish, like there is a possibility of no we aren't "allowed to eat" our own food and no there are "no raw foods available". This from a country that fed Europe in 1918 and 1945 and ships millions of tons of food to the world per year. The article is about those who eat certain foods from certain restaurants like an article about rainy days is about days that it rains not sunny days, or an article about Pittsburgh is about Pittsburgh and not Cleveland. I could google a million articles this instance that one could ask does that mean Cleveland is not allowed? Does that mean sunny days are not available? When writing an article like the one OP linked to the author doesn't have to preface it with every possible alternative in human history. A recent Modern Marvels cited that canned tuna is the #1 lunch item for Americans so obviously the article is about a minority of Americans. If you wish to raise a topic here at least be mindful of the Wikipedia pillar above policies of WP:COMMONSENSE. I think OP has some good questions but lets ease up on the vast general and absolute assumptions/inquires. Rainy day articles doesn't mean the sun doesn't exist or come out ever. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 19:31, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

To respond to the "salad bar-type of restaurant" comment, we (speaking as an American) don't really have those. The closest that we have to that would be a grocery store that has salad items available to make your own salad. But those are not nearly as prevalent as fast food restaurants. And as for raw food, we have plenty. I can even get raw milk around here. But then I live in a more rural area than many people. It's not as easy to get in the bigger cities. Dismas|^(talk) 20:03, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

They're perhaps not as prevalent as they should be, but salad bar restaurants can be found in some parts of the US. Souplantations and Sweet Tomatoes are mostly in the South; I hadn't heard of Fresh Choice or Souper Salad, but they're linked from the Souplantation article. Seems ironic that these (relatively) healthy restaurants would be found mostly in such an unhealthy region, though. --BDD (talk) 20:45, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

What makes the South an "unhealthy region"? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Higher obesity rates. Maybe it's something they ate. --BDD (talk) 21:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Being fat is almost always due to eating. HiLo48 (talk) 22:37, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

In the same way that people who breathe air almost always end up dying. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:40, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I believe he's saying what and how much you eat can make you fat, in the same way that what and how much you breathe can kill you. In your own terms: people who become fat from eating become fat from eating certain foods, like too much McDonalds cheeseburgers, etc. etc. in the same way that people can die from breathing the wrong stuff, like air laced with asbestos, or cigarette smoke. --Jayron32 01:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Except it's rarely as simple as just the amount and type of food eaten. That's energy in. There's also energy out, which typically comes from exercise. I'm generalising, but people with weight issues usually need to redress the imbalance by (a) modifying their eating, AND (b) doing more exercise than they currently do, which for many people means doing some exercise instead of virtually none at all. Just talking about the food side of this equation is crazy. It's like saying the only exercise one ever needs to do is urination, defecation and sweating. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, isn't the above completely obvious? How can this be a discussion. Do some people not realize that being fat is indicative only of overeating? (and medical issues which 'cause overeating'). I guess 0.2% of the population might eat less calories than they consume and somehow still gain weight but then again 0.2% of the population can subsist on sunshine alone too by that same token. It seems I've stumbled on some deeply ingrained marketing message, or something. I don't know what exactly. Could someone elaborate? How are the above posters debating the obvious, for example? 178.48.114.143 (talk) 03:31, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, what is your question you need help answering again? I'm having trouble telling if you are asking a genuine question in need of references to answer, or if you're trying to make some grand provocative statement but to mask your attempt at soapboxing by putting question marks rather than periods at the end of your sentences. Perhaps you could ask a simple question we could point you to answers to. --Jayron32 03:41, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Agreed Jayron32, see my 2nd post above for further reference. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 08:07, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

To those who think that obesity is merely a question of how much food you eat, this article in today's Observer might help you understand why it's a question of what's in the food you eat rather than how much. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:02, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

See my comment above at 4:47, Tammy. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 10:04, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

A spin-off question on the cultural differences between Europe and the US: At practically every workplace I ever worked in Sweden there was a lunch room (or fika room) where you could sit down and eat food you've taken with you. They had a fridge, one or more microwaves and a coffee maker, all supplied by the employer. Are these unusual in the US? The article in the OP seems to suggest that your only option is to leave the office and go to a restaurant, and I can't recall any American movies or TV series where people eat in a lunch room (sometimes they eat in the cafeteria, but that's not the same thing as a lunch room). Sjö (talk) 07:11, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

It often depends on the size of the business. From my experience, there's not a lot of "let's all eat together" camaraderie unless there is a group heading out to eat. I've worked for four companies. (The following assumes that the worker didn't go out to eat.) The first had a break room for the workers on the factory floor but the office staff didn't eat there for various reasons both practical and cultural. Most all the office staff ate at their desks though there was a conference table in a common area which could have been used. The second only had a five office employees. Office workers ate at their desk, those in the machine shop ate at a makeshift table in the shop. No conference room available. The third had a public kitchen/breakroom but it was often closed due for a customer's use (kid's birthday parties, we sold teddy bears). And the last has a full fledged cafeteria that operates during the day (technically the largest restaurant in the state, from what I'm told). Office workers here at night either eat at their desk or in a breakroom. I couldn't find anything approaching a reliable source for this but what I've described seems to cover most situations here in the US. Most of the search results that I found seem to verify that, if not eating out, American office workers eat at their desks. Dismas|^(talk) 08:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

What's the difference between a cafeteria and a lunch room? It's not as if you can't eat food from home in a cafeteria. In fact, that's what some of my coworkers do every day. --50.125.66.85 (talk) 18:54, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

A cafeteria would have staff that prepare food for you, probably not employed directly by the company that has the cafeteria in the building. Like at a school. A lunch room may just have some tables or it may have things like a refrigerator, sink, microwave, and vending machines. Dismas|^(talk) 19:28, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

User interface design and cultural differences

There exist some potentially non-obvious/ambiguous user interfaces. Some examples:

1. volume knob on an amplifier increases volume if turned clockwise (why not counter-clockwise?)
2. scrolling in (horizontal or vertical) menus using the rotation of a knob (who says clockwise means up?)
3. using left/right arrows to navigate up/down (e.g. k9-mail which is always confusing me)

Perhaps there are more examples. I was wondering whether all of such interfaces are supposed to be natural for all users or whether there are perhaps differences between left/right-handed people, people writing from left-to-right/right-to-left, people driving on the left/right side of the street, or just people from different cultures? Also, is "what feels natural" only a question of getting used to or are there perhaps some physiological things playing a role as well? bamse (talk) 14:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

For 1 and 2, clock faces are numbered 1 to 12 in a clockwise direction (because the rotation of the Earth causes shadows to rotate clockwise in the northern hemisphere), so things other than time are taken to increase in the clockwise direction. For 2, combine this with the mathematical convention (perhaps based on rungs of a ladder) where positive is taken as up. If measurement of time and clocks had been developed in the southern hemisphere, then things might have been different. (In some branches of Mathematics, positive angles are measured in an anticlockwise direction. It's all just convention.) I don't know what you mean by 3, but perhaps someone else does? Is it just that right and up are both taken as the positive directions? Dbfirs 18:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

A good book on this topic is Norman, Donald A. (2002). The design of everyday things. Basic Books. ISBN 9780465067107. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:34, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Interesting point about the clock. Thanks. I noticed "3" with the k9 email client, but it could also appear in other places. In k9 as in many other email clients you have the emails ordered in a list, line by line. If I go to the view of a single email, I can switch to previous/next using left/right arrow buttons. bamse (talk) 22:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I am an older person. I recall the earliest media player software. It had similar controls to much other software at the time. Nor problem for me. Then came "skins". They were completely different, with controls that were different from software in any other field. They were apparently meant to appeal to the target teenage of the time. No idea if they did. I couldn't figure them out. Then these (to me) weird controls became standard. I had no choice. Annoyed the crap out of me. HiLo48 (talk) 22:42, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Not just you, see this classic hallofshame Quicktime review. Didn't stop them, though. Unilynx (talk) 13:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

narrative aorist - ancient greek

I read [15] that aorsit can be use as narrative aorist. I did not understand very well the explanation. Somebody can bring another example? From what I read narrative aorist describes an action that is a part of a long action - e.g I walk ; if I want to describes the step, I would be use narrative aorist? --132.64.30.55 (talk) 15:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

This question would be more likely to get an answer on the Language desk. Looie496 (talk) 22:55, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Basically, "narrative aorist" means just those uses of the aorist where it corresponds to an English simple past tense. Sequences of events in a narrative (as in "he got up, had breakfast, and then went to work") are the most typical kind of context for this. This type of use can be distinguished from some other, more marginal types of uses of the aorist where the English translation would be in a different tense (such as the "gnomic aorist") on the one hand, and from past tense situations where Greek would use the imperfect and English would use a past progressive (as in "John was reading the newspaper when suddenly the telephone rang") on the other hand. (But I agree that the Language desk would probably be a better forum for continuing this, if you have more questions.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:06, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Countries where Jews outnumber Muslims

I was interested to learn that in Monaco, Jews outnumber Muslims, and wondered in what other countries that is the case. Israel, of course, and the US, though I note it's not the case in Canada or the UK. This isn't surprising, given the religions' very different ideas on proselytization. Still, in what other countries do Jews outnumber Muslims? Do any US states have more Muslims than Jews. I would've thought Michigan, though our article says both religions made up 1% of that state's population in 2007. I also wonder how these surveys determine who is a Jew. Probably self-identification, but if these questions are phrased in terms of religion, atheist Jews may not be counted as Jews. --BDD (talk) 20:38, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

What about atheist Muslims? HiLo48 (talk) 22:09, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I think that's a contradiction. According to us, a Muslim "is an adherent of Islam," which precludes atheism. While someone born into a Muslim family can certainly be an atheist, I don't think there's anything you can directly compare to Jewish atheism. --BDD (talk) 22:34, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I'm well aware of that. Maybe I was too subtle. It's your question. What exactly are you comparing? Surely it can really only be religious beliefs. Otherwise there's no point to a comparison. HiLo48 (talk) 23:08, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

According to the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies and this report, Islam is the largest non-Christian group in 20 American states, mostly in the South and Midwest: Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, North Carolina Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota and Wyoming. I assume that Jews are the largest non-Christian group in most other American states, although there may be a few states in which Buddhists or another non-Christian group come in second. John M Baker (talk) 22:44, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

A relevant concept is not "atheism" regarding the individual Jew or Moslem's belief, but whether or not they are affiliated with a congregation (synagogue/temple, mosque). How was this taken into account in the abovementioned survey? There are individuals who adhere to and identify with some of the tenets of either religion without attending worship services or paying dues to an organization. There are many self-identified Jews in America (and Israel, where I now live) of this sort; I'm not familiar with Muslim practice in the USA. Bearing in mind that much of both these religions involves codes of personal and interpersonal behavior and cultural practices - I vary from User:HiLo48's point above but agree that it would help if the OP would clarify whether religious affiliation vs. practice and self-identification are the query here.-- Deborahjay (talk) 05:48, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

According to the report: "The researchers define adherents to be those with an affiliation to a congregation including children, members and attendees who are not members, and believe that the adherent measure is the most complete and comparable across religious groups. Congregations are defined as groups of people who meet regularly at a pre-announced time and location." This would undercount the number of persons who identify as Jews, and to a lesser extent those who identify as Muslims. John M Baker (talk) 15:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

It would appear that the Jewish population of Brazil is larger than the Muslim population of that country, see Religion in Brazil. Latvia is another contender, although its so close as to be subject to the error margin of the census. Religion in Latvia. Thom2002 (talk) 20:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Titles Deprivation Act 1917

The title Titles Deprivation Act 1917 took away the titles for four Germans with British peer like the Duke of Cumberland and the Duke Albany but their heirs are allowed to petition for restoration of these titles. But does it mean that these titles can't be recreate it for another individual? Can Elizabeth II or parliament create Prince George as the Duke of Albany while the male heirs of Prince Leopold are still alive. --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 21:49, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

• If the rightful Duke under British law was Friedrich Josias Carl Eduard Kyrill Harald, Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (1918-1998), there is the slight matter of him having borne arms against his cousin King George VI. According to de.wikipedia, after joining the German Army as an officer cadet in 1938, he served in the illegal invasions of Czechoslovakia, Poland, France, Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. Returning to occupied France, he was then posted to occupied Denmark and in 1945 became a prisoner of the British. --Hors-la-loi 19:26, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

August 4

Ruhollah Khomeini's appointment of senior officials and laws on school principals

Under Khomeini's leadership of Iran, did senior government positions and school principals just have to be Muslims, or did they specifically have to belong to the Usuli Twelver Shia Islamic school? Could Sunni Muslims, members of other Shia schools, or members of other Islamic denominations hold these posts? 108.0.244.168 (talk) 01:46, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

In theory, every Muslim man and woman could be; but in practice, only adherents of that Islamic school were allowed to. Sunni Muslims only in Sunni provinces could have intermediate posts. --Omidinist (talk) 03:52, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

So the article should state that only members of whatever school most of the people in a certain province could hold senior government positions? 108.0.244.168 (talk) 04:19, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Could you rephrase your question, please? Is it a question or suggestion? --Omidinist (talk) 10:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

It is both a suggestion and question. The section about senior government positions and requirement of Muslim school principals is too vague. Did the laws specify what denominations of Islam qualify for these jobs or not? 108.0.244.168 (talk) 19:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Is Del Mar a part of San Diego

Is Del Mar a part of San Diego (city, not county)? The article describes it as a separate town. For example, do Del Mar residents vote for San Diego major, does the San Diego population include Del Mar, etc.?

If Del Mar is a part of San Diego, since what year? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.88.21.128 (talk) 05:24, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Del Mar residents do not vote for San Diego major and are outside the city of San Diego, even though they are in the same county. But this article is about which Muslims could hold certain positions in Iran under Khomeini. It doesn't say whether it includes just one Islamic school or others. 108.0.244.168 (talk) 06:14, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

1st it's "mayor", 2nd 108.0.244.168 is correct about it being outside San Diego city but inside San Diego county (2 very separate governments), 3rd how did this become about Iran, wait I don't want to know. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 15:22, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

That part must be in reference to the previous section, just above. The IP geolocates to southern California. It's like he's trying to response to two different comments at once, and that doesn't work. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:13, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Ah yes, doing the small screen today Bugs & never saw a combined response on here. Thanks. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 18:32, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

The question was added immediately after the previous question, and without a header, so it looked like part of the previous thread, but it clearly wasn't. I did the right thing and created a separate header. But I apparently failed to notice that someone had already added a response about the Khomeini question after this Del mar question had started but before I added the separate header. A comedy of errors indeed. Or, Les Folies Refdesques. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:38, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Or a 3rd rate burglary a "whole Bay of Pigs thing, a bizarre" :-). ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 20:28, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

FYI, the lead of the Del Mar, California article was slightly in error; the rest of the article shows that it's a city, not a town. Nyttend (talk) 16:49, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

This nomenclature is relative. California is the most populous state in the USA with a number of cities having hundreds of thousands up to several million residents. So an urban (or suburban) municipality - perhaps organizationally a "city" - with a population of 4K inhabitants is rightly termed a "town" - even a "small town." -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:13, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

All good points Deborahjay & Nyttend however since all states (and nations) define what constitutes a city differently it really doesn't matter since a "town" that size in Iowa or Ireland would be anything from a burg, boro, city or hamlet etc. The important part is that the county and major core city have the same name so although Del Mar is in San Diego it isn't in San Diego, the county and city respectively. Town or city it is an equal to San Diego city legally. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 18:36, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Do you good novomundane folks really spell borough as "boro"? Heavens above. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:38, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

lol, it's a Pennsyltucky thing n'at & dahn. Have seen it around other parts, New York City you have to be careful cause it's the county equivalent. But apologies since after 2007's "fair dinkum" at the airport I should be more aware of any creeping dialect. So yes borough, and thank you! :-) ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 19:56, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about getting into this section. Your question was originally in a section I started by mistake. That has now been fixed. 108.0.244.168 (talk) 20:08, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Cousin marriages in Tonga

What are the laws concerning first cousin marriages in Tonga? Cousin marriage doesn't mention Oceania at all.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 07:09, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Don't know about Tonga specifically, but in many anthropological cultures, marriage with a "parallel" cousin (father's brother's child or mother's sister's child) is forbidden as incest, while a "cross" cousin (mother's brother's child or father's sister's child) is a preferred marriage partner. In fact, in many kinship terminologies, the same terms are used for one's parallel cousins as for one's brothers and sisters, while one's cross cousins are referred to by terms equivalent to "brother-in-law" and "sister-in-law". In such a society, cousin marriage without any further context is meaningless -- it all depends on which kind of cousin. AnonMoos (talk) 18:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Mandatory school enrollment ((please help))

Is there a U.S. Federal or perhaps a Georgia State law in place that requires Public School Systems to accommodate and enroll ALL eligible children in their districts? I can't seem to find one, hoping you all can help. Thanks ˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandirum (talk • contribs) 07:13, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I fixed your title to make it actually useful. As for laws, that would rather depend on why they refuse to enroll a student. If it's because of a disability, then the Americans with Disabilities Act might apply. If it's because of the race of the child, perhaps the Civil Rights Act of 1964 might apply. If they refuse to let a girl into an all-boys school, then maybe Title IX might be applicable. StuRat (talk) 07:26, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!! I am new to this. The reason for this is they are filled up due to accepting out of county students who CHOSE to for some reason or another come here and pay a tuition and now there are 14 children on the waiting list and there must be 22 before a new pre-k class will open instead of pulling a couple out of each class to make another class these 14 will just be left behind unless they can afford to go 17 miles to the nearest school which is out of county and be charged a tuition themselves.. Brandirum — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandirum (talk • contribs) 08:35, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps pre-K is considered optional there. As a practical matter, I suggest you go to the press, who can shame them into doing the right thing a lot quicker and cheaper than a lawsuit can. StuRat (talk) 09:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Also, try getting the help of your Representative or local politicians - in the UK, Members of Parliament are usually quite good at sorting this sort of mess out. Alansplodge (talk) 19:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Siaosi U. Tukuʻaho

Siaosi U. Tukuʻaho was a Tongan prime minster and father of Viliami Tungī Mailefihi. His Tongan article calls him "Siaosi U. Tukuʻaho's". What did the U stand for in Siaosi U. Tukuʻaho's name? --KAVEBEAR (talk) 07:57, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Publishing false information about companies other than for profit

Recently, here in Australia, we had an interesting case. An environmental activist [allegedly--seeWP:BLP -medeis] put out a fake press release. It stated that a major bank (ANZ) had withdrawn its' loan facility for a controversial coal mining company (Whitehaven Coal) due to "corporate responsibility concerns". This caused a temporary plunge (or "blip") in the company's share price. He was charged with "making a false or misleading statement" under the Corporations act. The case has yet to go to trial.

My question is this: I assume that the laws regarding this area are based around concerns about people manipulating the markets in order to profit thereby, e.g. pump and dump scams. Or the reverse - people shorting a stock, than spreading rumours of bad news in order to re-purchase the shares at a lower price.

In this case, [the accused] was not an employee or investor in Whitehaven Coal. He had no fiduciary duty to the company or its' shareholders. He did not stand to gain (financially) from any movements in the company's share price. Nor did he hack the Stock Exchange's web site so as to pretend that the news came from "the market". Have courts ever ruled as to whether this sort of "not for profit" rumour-spreading breaks any securities laws?

I could imagine other situations where this could occur. For example, a bitter ex-employee (who does not hold shares in his former employer) falsely defaming a company in order to "get back" at them (but gaining nothing, financially, for himself). Has this ever been tested in court as to whether this breaches the law?

(I'm asking about Securities / Corporations law, not laws covering libel or defamation. Many jurisdictions don't allow corporations to sue for libel. And I'm asking about the law here, not morals or ethics).

I'm curious about any Jurisdiction, not just Australia. Has this question ever arisen? 203.45.95.236 (talk) 11:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't know about Australia, but in the United States the primary antifraud statute is Section 10(b) of the Securities Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, which apply only to transactions "in connection with the purchase or sale of any security." It's not immediately clear how the situation you describe would meet this test. The Supreme Court said in SEC v. Zandford that "the statute must not be construed so broadly as to convert every common-law fraud that happens to involve securities into a violation of § 10(b)." John M Baker (talk) 15:05, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

10b-5 is probably the primary law in the U.S., but I'm sure there are countless others that would apply too. Because you have some context with fiduciary duties, it's interesting to note that the insider trading definitions have expanded greatly since the 1980s, United States v. O'Hagan is probably a highwater mark in those terms. Shadowjams (talk) 16:55, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

• Please be careful not to violate WP:BLP. I have redacted the name of the accused as we have no article on the person and no proof of accusations is given here. μηδείς (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

The Yes Men are legendary culture jammers who have pulled many stunts like this. You might want to check their records, to see whether they've been sued or charged with an offence, and if so, what laws were invoked against them. BrainyBabe (talk) 20:12, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I also can't speak about Australia, but in the UK laws on fraud and suchlike encompass statements which either makes you something (usually but not always money) or causes someone else to lose or risk losing theirs. So you don't personally have to benefit. Prokhorovka (talk) 21:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Average potty training age by country?

I would like to know what the average potty training age by country is. Is it later for children in the western world? How about China, Japan or Africa? Thanks --KuchenZimjah (talk) 16:14, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Mesoamerica

Was Mesoamerica more populated than Europe before 1492?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 16:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

You yourself raised a question in July where this was discussed at length. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2013_July_13#Natives. Do you read answers to questions you post here? μηδείς (talk) 18:58, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Finance

An organization received a bill in the month of June. A check, written and mailed in June, was not cashed until sometime in July. At the end of the fiscal year, June 30th, the check was not cashed by the receiver and was not included in the organization's bank statement. Should the billed amount (same as check amount) show as a liability on the organization's balance sheet? (A U.S. Organization) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.215.120 (talk) 18:24, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, please always remember to "sign" your posts with ~~~~ so we may be able to see the user asking and their user page/talk page, a small but important point. Although this is asked somewhat as a hypothetical the conclusion one could draw from any answer would be borderline legal advice. We unfortunately do not give legal advice at Wikipedia thou other editors may respond to a more"with" limited "hypotheticals". ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 18:30, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

This sounds awfully like homework. If it is, we expect you to show what attempt you have made, and what help you need. --ColinFine (talk) 18:33, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Having come from the financial industry my 1st impression might be wrong, this may actually be homework as you observed ColinFine, then again ask Dennis Kozlowski or Martha Stewart about "creative accounting".Book keeping wasn't my side of the biz so I'll be quiet about caution & leave it with the above is the extent of my expertise on this one. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 18:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)