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

February 11

Royal Navy prize naming conventions

I've been reading a bit about 18th/19th century naval fighting, and noted a surprising pattern. When the British took captured French ships into service, they nearly always kept the original French name - with exceptions when the name was already taken (usually because they had captured an older French vessel, and the French re-used the name when they build a replacement). But when the British captured USS Wasp (1807) in the War of 1812, the renamed her HMS Loup Cervier, and when they captured USS Frolic (1813), they renamed her HMS Florida. On the other hand, USS Chesapeake (1799) kept her name, as did USS President (1800). So are the two sloops just freak renamings? Or where their names already in use for other ships? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:30, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

HMS Wasp was taken Blueboar (talk) 21:54, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

There was an HMS Frolic (1806) which was broken up at Portsmouth in November 1813. Maybe the news - hardly earthshaking - didn't reach the capturers of USS Frolic. (Anyway, what kind of a name is Frolic for a warship?) Clarityfiend (talk) 00:07, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Good point. Of course HMS Frolic was a brig, not a proper ship. For a brig, the name might be acceptable... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 01:02, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Should someone who calls a brig a ship be tossed in the brig or shipped to Siberia ? StuRat (talk) 05:11, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

The US Navy used their old brigs as prison hulks, whereas the Royal Navy used theirs for training. Thus "brig" doesn't mean a place of detention to the RN. See this previous thread. Alansplodge (talk) 08:21, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

February 12

IDs/kin and kinning

http://listography.com/2309224874/ids___kin_list__doubles_are_fine_/4473514330 This webpage lists fictional characters as "kins" or "IDs". http://listography.com/2309224874/dont_follow_if_/8706615680 This other webpage uses the word "kinning". Is this a form of otherkin or something else? -47.151.26.64 (talk) 07:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it appears to be a form of otherkin and/or furry. Matt Deres (talk) 12:51, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Rail Network statements

Who writes railway network statements? Is it lawyers or policy experts? Clover345 (talk) 09:52, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

On the Congo–Ocean Railway network? O Fortuna!^{...Imperatrix mundi.} 09:56, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

on the uk rail network. Clover345 (talk) 19:12, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Here are generic announcements that you may hear at railway stations, that have been pre-recorded by speakers variously identified as Anne, Mike, Celia Drummond, Phil Sayer, etc. Rail staff referred to Sayer's voice as "Metal Mickey". Example: "Here is a security announcement. Please do not leave luggage unattended anywhere on the station, any unattended luggage will be removed without warning and may be destroyed" Blooteuth (talk) 00:24, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

The keyword here is "generic". Many of these announcements are heard almost word for word at Walthamstow Bus Station, which is operated by Transport for London. To fill up the spaces between announcements they do a nice line in classical music. 86.151.49.189 (talk) 06:45, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I could be wrong, but I don't think the OP is referring to announcements at stations. I'm assuming they're referring to press releases by Network Rail, especially those which actually say they are statements. Stuff like this [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]. However I'm not saying there's a clear cut answer. A big problem is even you're restricting to press releases which call themselves and are structured as statements, as reflected by the exaples, you're still covering a whole bunch of different stuff. From issues which could would be an extremely major PR and perhaps even legal disaster if you're not very careful like statements after someone dies, or perhaps statements on strikes, legal cases, some major controversy and in some cases government or political or regulator proposals; to slightly more mundane stuff like a response to a some minor media story or political kerfuffle and maybe some more minor legal cases and crashes without injury or death, to more routine stuff like statements about annual general meetings or minor damage etc. (To be clear there's no clear boundary between these, it's going to depend on the specific case.) However while I don't know about the specifics for Network Rail, I'm fairly sure in most large companies or goverment bodies, both PR and legal departments are going to be involved in most cases. PR is more likely to be the one who'd actually write the statement. The more it matters the more care is likely to be taken (including using higher up people and more carefully reading it rather than just a cursory read). Some level of management is likely to be in there as well, and perhaps other departments as needed. Specific issues will also affect how much each is involved, e.g. regulatory issues or legal cases will get more attention from the legal department. Unfortunately I don't have a specific ref to support these claims. Nil Einne (talk) 09:09, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Note also I'm not sure how well the OP understands the structure of the UK rail network. As I understand it and supported by the refs, Network Rail owns a lot of the rail network infrastructure including tracks, many stations etc. The trains are mostly owned by others who also operate them (maybe not always the same), and the stations may also be managed by someone else. Network Rail statements are obviously for Network Rail. TOCs and FOCs and the station management (who tend to be TOCs or FOCs) have their own statements, processes etc. Then there are other organisations e.g. National Rail. Nil Einne (talk) 09:16, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

BTW, and this is possibly reflected in the above examples, I don't mean to imply there is always going to be that level of involvement. For example, if the CEO is at a public event with reporters and word reaches that someone was killed, they can't just say "wow that sucks, but no comment until I've consulted with PR and legal". Instead they'll likely make a brief generic statement like "I'm saddened to hear of the tragic death of XYZ and my thoughts are with their family and friends. Network Rail will cooperate fully with the investigation." Similarly if something arises in a media interview etc. It's possible this will be repeated in a later released written media statement. (Although it's also possible the person will screw up and there will need to be some walking back of the statement.) Nil Einne (talk) 09:39, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I thought a network statement (in a narrow sense) was a document, published every year by the company managing the railway network (in the UK that would be Network Rail), describing the railway network, timetable planning rules, fees for using track and stations etc. It tells the train operators (both passenger and goods) where they can run what kind of trains and how to apply for timetable slots. It informs the operators of their rights and obligations. So the technical chapters (on loading gauges, electric power supply standards, speed limits, platform lengths, ...) would be written by the technical department, the financial chapters (on fees, fines, liability in case of accidents, ...) are more likely written by the legal department. And of course the general management has to give its approval. Apparently (so tells the dutch wikipedia), the legal status of these statements is exactly described in EU rule 2001/14/EG5 article 3. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:18, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

There are some names here if you want to go direct to Network Rail for information:

[file:///C:/Users/NL_STH1403157PUBLIC/ Downloads/Department%20for%20Transport%20Network%20Rail%20reporting%20requirement%20(1).pdf]

156.61.250.250 (talk) 13:18, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

How do we read a file on your computer? --Jayron32 13:49, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Try typing the part inside the bracket into your address bar. If that doesn't bring up the document there's another way to access it which I will tell you about. 156.61.250.250 (talk) 14:03, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

It won't work for anyone except YOU because the part in the bracket is a location on YOUR hard drive. This is not an internet address, it's a hard drive location. --Jayron32 14:19, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Go to [14] then click on "Department for Transport Network Rail reporting requirement". Scroll down to section 8. 156.61.250.250 (talk) 14:27, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

A simple link to what you're referring to is probably [15]. Anyway it may be that PiusImpavidus is right about what statements are being referred to in which case they're probably right about who's involved. Edit: And I apologise for any confusion by my answer. Nil Einne (talk) 10:06, 14 February 2017 (UTC) Edit: 05:43, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Privilege and prestige of different ranks of peerage in the UK

I'm aware that peerages have only limited significance in British life today, but that this wasn't always the case. In times gone by, were there ever differences between

1. rights and privileges awarded to different ranks of peerage?
2. significant differences in prestige of different ranks of peerage? I'm aware that this may be a harder question to answer as degree of prestige is ill-defined; however, as I understand it, dukes are seen as much "higher" than marquesses, whilst the difference between a Marquess and a baron is smaller. Is that at all correct?

--Leon (talk) 12:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Does our article on Peerage Ranks help at all?--Phil Holmes (talk) 12:37, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Not that I can see. But maybe I'm missing something.--Leon (talk) 12:52, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

[1] different ranks give different positions in terms of precedence, with (as you'd expect) the higher ranks higher in the order of precedence, and individual title holders order within those ranks by the peerage in which the title was created and the date of creation of their titles. So at social affairsand official ceremonies the higher ranks would enter first, sit closer to the monarch, etc. Each rank also has traditional coronets, etc. [2] Dukes are, as you point out, though of as much higher than any other rank. They are expected to be richer, and are thought of as nearly prince-like. - Nunh-huh 22:30, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Various distinctions would have existed in the past.

1. At the most basic level, peerages came with lands, and higher ranks generally got more/better lands, with more people to serve/fight for them. I don't know if there was a formal rule about how much each title was supposed to get you.
2. The sort of land or its location did vary by title: from Marquess "the distinction between a count and a marquess was that the land of a marquess, called a march, was on the border of the country, while a count's land, called a county, often was not. As a result of this, a marquess was trusted to defend and fortify against potentially hostile neighbours and was thus more important and ranked higher than a count".
3. Marcher Lords (which as far as I can tell is basically an older term for a marquess) had a lot of specific rights: within their own territory, they had various powers (e.g. lawmaking) that elsewhere were reserved for the king.
4. Duke doesn't actually say much about the rights and powers a duke gets, other than that the may (but not necessarily) get a duchy to run and extract income from. Originally (as dux in the Roman Empire) they were provincial governors, later becoming the highest-ranking nobles and military commanders after the king.
5. According to Count, the title originated in the Roman Empire, as comes, a non-hereditary title for high-ranking courtiers and provincial officials, either military or administrative. It later became an intermediate title of nobility, that could also be used as an honorific title for special services rendered without necessarily any lands attached. The UK doesn't use the title, using Earl instead (although an earl's wife is a countess).
6. Earl seems to have originally been a title for a chieftain, then became equivalent to dukes. After the Norman Conquest, the title seems to have been downgraded to equivalent to a count.

Iapetus (talk) 14:41, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

In Britain, below Earl would be Baron and then Baronet. There are also counts palatine which carry the rank of count with certain privileges of autonomy not usually allowed to garden variety counts. If we're looking to ranks outside of England, to Scotland, there are Mormaer which are usually translated to English as "Earls" but whose rank within Scottish society was something more like a Duke. Scotland also had Lairds, which are usually equivalent to Lords of the Manor in England, except they tended to have power somewhat greater than that. There's also other titles from outside of Scotland and England but still "British", such as the Lord of Mann which unlike other lords, was semi-sovereign, having grown from the King of Mann. --Jayron32 03:14, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Baronet is not a rank of peerage. It's a hereditary knighthood. Baronets are not peers. - Nunh-huh 05:41, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

February 13

Vexillology Question

Here is an odd question for someone, just out of curiosity. Can someone provide a proper blazon for the six-stripe rainbow flag (that is, the version that is traditionally used as an LGBT flag)? I am aware that any of the versions of the rainbow flag violate the rule of tinctures because they place colour adjacent to colour, but it serves its purpose.

I have also seen this flag with a "union" that is that of the United States flag, but the blazon for that would seem to be straightforward enough, because that would be 'canton azur, fifty mullets argent'. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:42, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm sure some description could be cobbled together, but the standard basic terminology doesn't go any further than three color blocks placed side by side -- i.e. "tierced per fess". More usually, blazoning proceeds by having things be on other things, not side by side (so the mullets argent are on the canton azure which is on the field). AnonMoos (talk) 01:18, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, a field with several horizontal stripes ("bars") is described as "barry". According to that article, "The arms of Eyfelsberg zum Wehr provide a perhaps unique example of barry of four different tinctures that do not repeat". Don't know what the heraldic term for "hot pink" is though! Alansplodge (talk) 01:25, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

For the 6-stripe flag, no hot pink is needed. It's the 7-stripe flag that requires that special knowledge. - Nunh-huh 05:22, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

In standard basic terminology, "barry" refers to stripes which alternate between two colors. I don't think it could be used to describe stripes of six different colors without going significantly beyond standard basic terminology. AnonMoos (talk) 01:35, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

If it can describe four, surely it can describe six or seven? Note that the ancient College of Arms in London solemnly instructs government offices (presumably including themselves) to fly the Rainbow Flag during Pride Week unless when "there is only one flagpole the Armed Forces Flag will in most cases take precedence" because it's also Armed Forces Week in the UK. [16] Alansplodge (talk) 01:40, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Boring answer, judging from the coat of arms of 246TH Field Artillery Regiment is that's it's probably something like "barry of six in the colours of the rainbow proper" (which also means it can violate the rule of tincture, since proper colours are the exception to the rule). Smurrayinchester 07:28, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Why Rohingya people not turn violent like other discrimated Muslim groups?

With many problems in Arab world, many discrimated Muslim groups like the Uighur people in China and the Malays in Thailand/Philippines turn violent, some join ISIS. Rohingya people in Myanmar are even most discrimated but why they not turn violent and join ISIS? --Curious Cat On Her Last Life (talk) 15:45, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

The spread of violent Islamic fundamentalism can be modeled like the spread of a disease. Thus, certain random events, like if a person so infected moves into the heart of the community, can account for such differences. As far as having been discriminated against, that doesn't seem to be a requirement, as those trying to spread it are happy to lie and claim there's a global effort to exterminate all Muslims, if it gets them more recruits. StuRat (talk) 15:50, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Meta discussion on reference desk conduct. Probably not useful, but we can hope.

Do you ever have any intention of providing references for any of your statements, or do you intend to just keep typing the first thing to come into your head? --Jayron32 15:54, 13 February 2017 (UTC) Do you ever intend to stop lying ? A review of my contributions will point out thousands of sources, as you well know. Here's a couple I provided about an hour before your post: [17], [18]. I don't always include sources, but then neither do you. But I do at least attempt to keep bickering off this page, unlike you, who often instigate it. StuRat (talk) 16:13, 13 February 2017 (UTC) When you hear the same complaint, from many different people, over a period of several years, you may consider that they might have a point about a problem with your conduct, and it just maybe, it might not be the case that everyone is out to get you for totally unfair reasons. Just some food for thought. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:48, 13 February 2017 (UTC) It's human nature to pick a scapegoat for any evil you want to name, especially if you engage in that evil yourself, and for everyone to pile on whatever available scapegoat they can find (see Wikt:jump on the bandwagon). If I see an analysis of my edits versus everyone else's that proves I provide useful refs less often, then I might believe it. Otherwise, when Jayron or others claim that I never give refs, that's an obvious lie, so such claims do nothing but lower their credibility. Indeed, lies and exaggeration are essential to setting up a scapegoat. StuRat (talk) 21:08, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The question as written is unanswerable. That is because the OP has made statements which are unproven, and has assumed they are true. This is called the Complex question fallacy, and is best exemplified by the question "When did you stop beating your wife?" Since that presumes some concept which has not yet been shown to be true (that you ever beat your wife), the actual question (when did it stop?) cannot be answered. Likewise, the OPs question contains many presumptions which they have not demonstrated are true, such as the general violence of Muslim groups. --Jayron32 15:54, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

The many Muslims I've known have not been violent. Nor is there any evidence to suggest that Muslims in general are violent. There are violent persons in all religions. The OP's premise is fundamentally flawed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:25, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I didn't see them state that Muslims in general are violent. StuRat (talk) 16:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I didn't see them provide their definition of "many", either. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:11, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I also have Muslim friends that not violent. Agree there are violent persons in all religions. Discrimated groups likely to turn violent, example Tamil Tigers. Muslim groups that not discrimated (like in Singapore) do not turn violent. Question is why the very discrimated Rohingya people do not turn violent? --Curious Cat On Her Last Life (talk) 17:39, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

For convenience: the Rohingya people. I don't know much about this, but the article discusses several episodes of unrest and possible violence stemming from discrimination. "The 2012 Rakhine State riots were a series of conflicts between Rohingya Muslims who are majority in the northern Rakhine and ethnic Rakhines who are majority in the south. "

So at least somewhat recently, some Rohingya have been involved in riots. Our article seems pretty good, I'd recommend reading it and some of the references cited there if you want to learn more about those people. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

See Rohingya insurgency in Western Myanmar and Harakah al-Yaqin. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:10, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

February 14

Why have end dates on lists of office holders?

I'm not sure this is the best place to ask this, since it's kind of specifically about how to write articles, but ... why do we need end dates for office holders where the start/end date is always going to be the same, and there's no gaps? For example, let me pull from the List of Governors of Alabama:

Governor	Term in office
William Wyatt Bibb	December 14, 1819 – July 10, 1820
Thomas Bibb	July 10, 1820 – November 9, 1821
Israel Pickens	November 9, 1821 – November 25, 1825

Couldn't this just be easily condensed to...

Governor	Took office
William Wyatt Bibb	December 14, 1819
Thomas Bibb	July 10, 1820
Israel Pickens	November 9, 1821

... and not even mention when they left office? Because they obviously left office the moment their successor took office?

I mean, when there's a true gap in the governorships, it should rightly show an interregnum (as seen for Alabama from May 1, 1865, to June 21, 1865 - astute readers can probably guess why), so it's not needed for that. I could only see it needed in cases where

• Officeholders usually take office on a different day. Or, in other words: Outgoing leaves at 11:59pm, incoming starts at 12:00am. This is how New York does it, and I think it would be perfectly fine explaining in the text that the term starts at midnight.
• There are common gaps, but even in this case I'd rather there be an explicit note of an interregnum rather than forcing the reader to notice which end dates and start dates have gaps between them.

Thoughts? --Golbez (talk) 04:27, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't know about as a general rule, but it can be useful in some cases. If you copy a line out for your own purposes, you don't need to go back and find the end date. And if the table is sortable (not in this case, but it could be), the term end information can be lost if sorted in any manner other than date. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:34, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

I dislike sorting lists, don't really see the point, but this is an excellent argument - as long as we do make lists sortable, I suppose each row's info should be self-contained. --Golbez (talk) 04:58, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

It just seems clearer to state the dates explicitly rather than have to make assumptions. StuRat (talk) 04:37, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Francis Funk

I am trying to find more information about a person named Francis Funk (other than the stuff I've already created for this article), who was a major and adjutant general in the Hawaiian Army, a sheriff, a lawyer and a member of the Hawaiian House of Representatives from 1851 to 1853. He could have been German or a German-American. All traces about him disappears after 1853 for some reason.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 10:49, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Maybe you'll get better results by using the search term "Franz Funk", his original name, though admittedly I can't find much. At any rate he seems to have been a Prussian. [19] [20] --Antiquary (talk) 11:56, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Who polices the police?

We hear activists echo this maxim all the time - "who polices the police"? Well, technically, who does? Let's use U.S.A. or U.K.-based police forces as an example. We know about internal affairs. However, what actual oversight is there when the people feel the police are being covered for?--WaltCip (talk) 13:46, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

This concern is long - standing - the Latin phrase is Quis custodet custodes. See Police Complaints Commission. 156.61.250.250 (talk) 13:59, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

The phrase is actually "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?", and we have an article on it. --Viennese Waltz 14:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, kind of silly that we've attributed to government oversight a phrase that was originally the ultimate in slut shaming. --Golbez (talk) 14:48, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

See Category:Police oversight organizations.—Wavelength (talk) 14:50, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

• The general terminology for such an office or person to whom complaints about officials, such as police, are addressed is ombudsman. Many municipalities and police departments will have one. Their job is investigate such complaints. --Jayron32 14:53, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

• Here in California, if a local police department is corrupt, the California Highway Patrol (our name for our state police) can investigate and, if needed, arrest them. A quick search shown no obvious oversight of the CHP (see [ www.mercurynews.com/2014/07/07/policing-the-chp-beating-shows-officers-need-independent-oversight/ ] and [ petitions.moveon.org/sign/independent-civilian ]) but I suppose the FBI has the authority to investigate the CHP. But of course this just kicks the question upstairs; who polices the FBI? The CIA? The NSA? What recourse is there when a government agency is able to keep what it is doing secret? --Guy Macon (talk) 16:54, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

• That, of course, is the key issue raised by Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?: At some point, there is no greater authority to check the authority for which you need to check. In a democracy, that greater authority is supposed to be "the people" who have a role in electing people like sheriffs, attorneys general, justice ministers, etc; and if they are corrupt or don't do their job, are supposed to be able to be voted out. --Jayron32 17:11, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

• If the police commit an actual crime (as opposed to mere incompetence, prejudice, etc.), then that can can go up to the next level of government, in some jurisdictions.

• The press can report on police misconduct, but that relies on them either being present when it occurs or finding witnesses who are willing to talk.

• Social media, combined with cell phone cameras, can now reveal police misconduct which occurs in public. In many cases the police will say a shooting was justified and there will be no investigation, until a cell phone video shows what happened, then all of a sudden they change their mind and launch an investigation.

• Police body cameras and dashboard cameras have the potential to reveal police misconduct, but only if the laws require the release of those videos under FOIA laws. Even then, there seems to be a pattern with police videos often being lost or unviewable when they seem likely to incriminate police officers. If the videos were sent, real-time, to a neutral party for storage, that would end this problem.

• Once the public knows about police misconduct, the democratic process can take over to correct it. Depending on the jurisdiction, the police commissioner/chief of police/sheriff may be elected directly, or appointed by the mayor, who is himself elected. So, voting one or both out of office has the potential to solve the problem.

• Note that this is ultimately a subset of the broader conflict of interest problem. StuRat (talk) 17:09, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Here in NL the "marechaussee" (military police) polices the police. Of course this differs per jurisdiction. Jahoe (talk) 20:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

(NL apparently means the Netherlands.) StuRat (talk) 23:18, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Correct. Sorry for that, I thought it would be clear. Jahoe (talk) 00:31, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

@Jahoe: That's OK. It was. O Fortuna!^{...Imperatrix mundi.} 06:02, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

• To give a couple of concrete examples from the UK: the South Yorkshire Police have been investigated various times in various ways, relating to crimes committed by its officers. One is the Battle of Orgreave, when SYP officers attacked a picket line during the Miner's Strike. This was investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, which is the usual watcher-of-watchmen. One is the Hillsborough disaster, which was a crush caused by poor crowd control and subsequently covered up. This was finally investigated by a specially created body, the Hillsborough Independent Panel, since previous investigations were tainted by the close links between SYP chiefs and politicians. And one is misuse of a police helicopter to spy on people having sex. This was investigated by South Yorkshire Police themselves, because it was a relatively minor crime involving only a few officers. Finally, although not a crime, the force was investigated by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary for failing to protect victims of the Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal properly. So those are some of the ways that the police in the UK are watched. Smurrayinchester 09:55, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

The problem with saying that the police are policed by the voters, the press, social media, etc. is that none of those entities can investigate a crime using the tools that even a one-person police department has. In particular, they cannot detain a person, ask a judge for a search warrant, etc. The voters, the press, social media, etc. can do certain things once it is known that a crime was committed and who did it, but only the police or something very much like the police can do a proper investigation when those are unknown. Which leaves us with our quandary once again; who polices the top-level police?

Possible answers:

• Gordon Sumner polices The Police
• Chief Inspector of Police Jean de Dieu Mayira polices the Police
• Sławomir Mrożek policed The Police
• The De Rigo brothers police Police
• Charlie Chaplin policed Police
• Maurice Pialat policed Police
• V. K. Prakash policed Police
• Roger Graef policed Police
• And of course Police, Police, Police, Police, Police, Police, Police, and Police are each policed by Police Police Departments (PPD).^{[Citation Needed]} --Guy Macon (talk) 22:27, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Kerman Airport

In what year did the Kerman Airport in Iran begin operating? M2545 (talk) 15:35, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

1970, according to the website of the airport: kerman.airport.ir. Omidinist (talk) 19:12, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Credit here: [21]

Which US states are like this?

State roads: all 3 digits

County roads: all at least 4 digits

Do any such states have no intermetropolitan area Interstates or US routes over 99? No 3 digit federal routes at all? The last seems unlikely - loops, spurs and bypasses are everywhere. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:01, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

There is no state which meets your first condition, and I don't think there's any which meet your second either. There is a state with no signed federal routes — Alaska. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

There are "interstate" highways in Alaska, same as in Hawaii and Puerto Rico. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:26, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Correct, but none of them are signed as such. They're either signed with state highway numbers or not at all. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:33, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Here's the closest for you:

• No 3-digit U.S. Routes: Rhode Island (highest is U.S. 44), Hawaii (has no U.S. Routes), Alaska (has no U.S. Routes, except briefly when U.S. 97 was designated, but never signed).
• No 3-digit Interstate Routes: Alaska (no interstates are signed, though several are designated "on paper". None has 3 digits, however), New Mexico (highest is I-40), North Dakota (though a part of the Bismarck Expressway is designated, but unsigned, as I-194).
• State roads are all 3 digits: None, though Nevada comes closest as there are only two Nevada state routes which aren't 3-digits. One may also count the District of Columbia which has one numbered route, District of Columbia Route 295.
• County roads of 4+ digits: Probably none, though the county routing systems are haphazard across the U.S. at best. Signed 4-digit routes are rare. Some states have secondary route systems which are signed with 4 digits regularly. For example, the North Carolina Highway System has 4 digit secondary routes, which are sometimes marked with plain white rectangles. These secondary state routes recycle numbers between counties, but are not county routes but rather state routes. Texas also uses 4 digits on its Farm-to-market road system, but that is a secondary state routing system, not a county system.

Those are my best attempts at an answer. Since Wikipedia has a comprehensive coverage of every state highway system in the U.S., you can also peruse the articles yourself. --Jayron32 18:45, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, that's a great answer. As an extremely urban non-driver I mistakenly thought the minor 4 digit roads were county roads. It's still a bit hierarchical in states with 4 digit secondary state roads but none have decided to segregate it so 1-2=federal 3=intermediate 4=minor apparently. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:06, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

No, each state manages its own road systems. The numbering of Interstates and U.S. routes is managed by the AASHTO, which is an organization of the states (not a Federal one, but of the states acting outside of the federal government) while state road numbering is handled by each state, on its own, with no coordination. Many states have no county road numbering systems, and of those that do, some allow counties to develop their own numbering and signage system with no interference from the state. The MUTCD is a publication encouraging uniform road signage, but with regards to numbering of state highways, the states basically ignore its guidelines. Generally, if a state has a system (and many do not, assigning route numbers haphazardly), lower numbered routes are historically more important longer-distance routes, while higher numbered routes tend to be shorter or more "back woods" sorts of routes. For some examples, in Massachusetts the longest state routes are routes like Massachusetts Route 2 and Massachusetts Route 9 and Massachusetts Route 28, low 1- and 2- digit numbers, while higher numbers like Massachusetts Route 213 and Route 286 (Massachusetts – New Hampshire) are short connector routes. You find similar patterns in Virginia (see List of primary state highways in Virginia) and List of state routes in New York, where most of the longest routes have low numbers. Some states, however, eschew even this logic. List of state routes in New Hampshire shows little rhyme or reason as to length, List of Maryland state highways shows that most state numbered highways are fantastically short, and route numbers are assigned mostly by geographic location rather than length. You are, however, correct that for the most part, 4-digit routes (where they are used) tend to be minor roads. Unless they aren't: until fairly recently the Fairfax County Parkway (formerly VA 7100) and the Prince William Parkway (Formerly VA 3000) were major regional arterial roads with 4-digit numbers. Virginia recently realized the folly of this and upgraded the roads to Primary Road status, granting them shiny new low 3-digit numbers. --Jayron32 03:40, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Touching on Virginia, see Byrd Road Act; all public roads in 93 of our 95 counties, outside of some towns, are state-maintained, so they're all technical state highways, but 1-599 are primary highways with unique-statewide numbers, while 600 and larger are secondary roads with numbers that can be re-used in every county, and since more-populous counties have lots of roads, numbers can often get into the four digits in those counties. Roads in the latter category aren't maintained at anything close to equal levels; last week, when I took Sharon Springs Road, VA 623 in Tazewell County connecting Burke's Garden to Ceres (location 37°4′12″N 81°18′38″W), I found it to be a slightly-gravelled muddy route with rock outcrops (often small boulders a few feet long and a few inches high) and tons of shallow mud-or-water holes (in one of which I nearly got stuck), while a few miles north, the section of VA 623 that's the main route into Burke's Garden is a good two-lane asphalt road with lane markings everywhere and guardrails when appropriate. Nyttend (talk) 23:35, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

PS, Sagittarian Milky Way, Kentucky is a little closer than is Virginia to what you were imagining. Most of their roads are county- or city-maintained (all KY municipalities are cities), but they have a very large number of state highways, and while many of the four-digit highways are minor (extreme example image), you'll see from List of primary state highways in Kentucky that some low-numbered roads, such as Kentucky Route 5, have no sections with primary status, while highways with some primary-status sections have numbers as high as 3155. Nyttend (talk) 23:41, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

HMRC mileage rate

How is the HMRC mileage rate of 45p per mile calculated? It's vastly more than petrol costs, so what else is it designed to take into account? Amisom (talk) 19:30, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Among other likely sources: Car insurance, depreciation of car value, and maintenance costs. [22] --Golbez (talk) 20:03, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

It is based on calculations of the average cost of running a car - this link will give you more numbers than you could possibly need about that. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/117861/response/291930/attach/html/4/120106%20Analysis%20of%20motoring%20costs2.xls.html Wymspen (talk) 16:59, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Did the fascists officially prohibit International Women's Day?

According to the German Wikipedia page, International Women's Day was prohibited under Fascist Germany, but there’s no visible source for this.

Can anybody cite this? — (((Romanophile))) ♞ (contributions) 20:10, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

English translation for دبیرستان ایرانشهر کرمان?

What is the English language name of the Iranian school دبیرستان ایرانشهر کرمان? -- M2545 (talk) 20:19, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Using Google Chrome's auto-translation service for the article at fa.wikipedia.org for the above school, (See [23] ) suggests "Kerman High School Iranshahr" as a likely translation. However, you may want to ping a Farsi speaker for confirmation. Category:User fa lists English Wikipedia users who self-identify as Farsi speakers as well. --Jayron32 20:26, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. How does one "ping a Farsi speaker"? -- M2545 (talk) 20:38, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

He's suggesting you contact people on that list, but before you do so, you might want to keep in mind that the real meaning of "User:fa" is that someone is willing and able to answer questions in Farsi, which is not always the same as being willing or able to answer questions about Farsi.

However, User:Omidinist seems to knows a lot about Farsi, and formerly frequented this ref desk page, so you might ask him... AnonMoos (talk) 02:12, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

The English translation of the name of that high school in the city of Kerman would be: Iranshahr High School of Kerman. Omidinist (talk) 04:48, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Credit here: [24] -- M2545 (talk) 14:12, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Does Florida's terroir prevent getting close to fine Cuban cigar tobacco quality?

Is it too alkaline or cold or..? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:18, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

I never heard that Florida was a big commercial tobacco-growing state. Instead, it's states like North Carolina and Kentucky... AnonMoos (talk) 02:25, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

North Carolina and Kentucky primarily grow cigarette tobacco. American tobacco intended for use in premium cigars is grown chiefly in New England. See Connecticut shade tobacco. --Jayron32 03:22, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

So if they do it in New England then maybe Florida's soil ph, mineral content etc. isn't good for that despite being closer to Cuba in climate? Why don't the states between Maryland and Connecticut grow much tobacco? Soil? Competition from slave states preventing a tradition of tobacco growing from continuing to the present day? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 08:08, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article titled Cultivation of tobacco, but it does not discuss soil conditions. I did find This old pamphlet which discusses soil conditions suitable for each type of tobacco, and where specifically in Connecticut it is found. That pamphlet has a LOT of good information, which could likely be useful to expanding Wikipedia's coverage. It should be noted that it isn't strictly true that Tobacco is only grown in New England and south of the Mason-Dixon. It is most associated with those areas, but I have found information on tobacco farming in Upstate New York and Pennsylvania Amish Country. New Jersey doesn't seem to have any native tobacco industry, excepting a few blogs written by hobbyists trying to grow it on a very small scale. Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas and Georgia are all well known for growing the crop; part of that may be historical: Tobacco plantations in the 1700s and 1800s were supported by slave labor, so there grew a tradition of tobacco farming that wasn't as prevalent up north. It may be (though I am now just speculating) that tobacco could be grown in New Jersey, but it hasn't ever been, so it still isn't. --Jayron32 13:06, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

February 15

Historical or semi- or quasi-historical novels or romans a clef in which Donald Trump has appeared as a major or minor character

Wikipedia reports:

"A parody of Trump is the main villain in the 1992 The Destroyer novel Ghost in the Machine.[21][22] Andrew Shaffer's satirical book, The Day of the Donald (2016), imagines Trump winning the election and discusses his second year as America's 45th president.[23] Jacob M. Appel's novel, The Mask of Sanity (2017), describes a high functioning sociopath modeled on Trump."

This seems like a surprisingly short list. Anybody know of other novels in which Trump is fictionalized? He's been around for a long time, and novels often are set in the not-too-distant past. (For example, one can imagine a Trump-like character appearing in Tom Wolfe's Bonfire of the Vanities or A Man In Full.) 2602:304:CDA0:9220:91C7:E10A:2FC1:38C1 (talk) 00:53, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Biff Tannen—particularly his future depiction in Back to the Future Part II—is modeled on Trump. clpo13_(talk) 00:59, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

How can we forget the classic Trump Temptation: The Billionaire and the Bellboy. More of a short story than a novel, though.

Written in four hours by comedian Elijah Daniel, after he mooted the idea on Twitter (“I’m going to get drunk tonight and write an entire donald trump sex novel like 50 shades of grey & put it on amazon tomorrow i swear to god”), Trump Temptation: The Billionaire and the Bellboy was published last week after Daniel was deluged with comments urging him to go ahead. It is currently No 1 in Amazon.com’s gay erotica chart, No 1 in its humorous erotica chart, and fourth in its Kindle erotica chart.

Carbon Caryatid (talk) 19:35, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

References

Suicide Rates Amongst Existential Nihlists.

[Moved here from the math ref desk]

Does anyone know the suicide rate amongst existential nihilists? Americanfreedom (talk) 00:25, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

First, how would you determine who all are existential nihilists? Unless you're only talking about famous ones. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:22, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Madoc

Was Madoc a legendary figure with a real father, or was he a real person who got transformed into a legend, like the real British petty king whose story was transformed into King Arthur? Or do we not know? 208.95.51.115 (talk) 14:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Probably unknown or unknowable. As noted in the article Madoc, the first written account of such a figure is either Willem die Madoc maecte (c. 1250) or Maredudd ap Rhys (c. 1400). Either way, such accounts would have occurred more than a century after Madoc was reported to have lived. Just remember that Medieval chronicles, such as Historia Regum Britanniae and the Ynglinga saga, while they were once considered "historical", often well into modern times, are now considered entirely fanciful. Unless such accounts can be independently verified (such as by contemporary documents or engravings) then the degree to which the figures named in them are actual historical figures should be considered an open question. There are figures from the Madoc legend which HAVE been independently verified, like Owain Gwynedd, for which we have sources contemporary to his life. There was a contemporary figure Madog ap Maredudd, for which we do have reliable accounts, but it appears that he is not considered to be the same person. --Jayron32 15:00, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Tehran-Mashhad railway

In what year did the Tehran-Mashhad railway in Iran begin operating? -- M2545 (talk) 14:52, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

1966. Omidinist (talk) 19:18, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Thought experiment about culpability for accidental killing of a suicidal person

I am trying to find a thought experiment scenario (I think I've seen this quoted as a final exam question for law students) which goes something like this: Person A is suicidal and jumps off a tall apartment building. In the building, Person B fires a gun at Person C, but misses and the bullet goes through the window, hitting A. B was trying to threaten C but didn't know the gun was loaded, and there are further complicating factors. The question is to determine who, if anyone, is culpable for the killing of A. I can't think of anything specific enough to Google for this, so help finding it would be appreciated. 2602:306:321B:5970:9C57:D2B8:6A37:26C8 (talk) 14:56, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

See Ronald Opus. --Jayron32 15:05, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

That is the famous source, but our article doesn't really address the real issue of cause/culpability. Since it's just a story, the speaker can end in any way they choose. In this case, they simply say the case was closed as suicide, but that's just like, their opinion, man :) Perhaps I'll add some of the links below to the "see also" section of that article... SemanticMantis (talk) 15:48, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

I asked a similar question here about a year ago! I got some good answers and references, please see that thread. Causation_(law)#Independent_sufficient_causes covers some of the legal aspects, but IMO there is still plenty left to ponder on the philosophical side. Also perhaps relevant is Joint_and_several_liability. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:45, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

thank your both, that's the story I was thinking of! I'll check out the old discussion thread later when I have more time. 2602:306:321B:5970:4CEB:7FAC:B2F3:C7B6 (talk) 15:57, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

He wouldn't die before impact unless it damaged the brain stem or was a damn long fall. Even whole body removal takes 13 seconds to kill. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:26, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

You know, unless he were shot with a rocket propelled grenade with sufficient explosive force to reduce him to centimeter-scale chunks of meat. I'm pretty sure that would mean he died before he hit the pavement. --Jayron32 18:53, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Dead is brain dead. It would take a very long fall to die of mere bleeding before the time the ground would've killed him anyway if he wasn't shot. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:34, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

If your brain is in tiny pieces raining down upon the land below intermingled with other parts of your body, it's hard to argue it was alive before the bits of it hit the ground. --Jayron32 03:10, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that is the overkill method. Congratulations, you have found the gray area of dead (how damaged a brain stem before you're dead?) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 04:49, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

But in the "Ronald Opus" version at least (I don't know about other tellings of the same basic concept) there's a safety net, so the victim wouldn't have hit the ground. This makes it clear that the shot is what killed him, which is relevant to the question of whether the shooter is culpable. 132.239.165.115 (talk) 19:55, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

We do not offer legal information or advice.--WaltCip (talk) 19:01, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

You forgot to add the smiley face emoticon to the end of that. See Poe's law. --Jayron32 19:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Note that in the Ronald Opus story, there is a specific answer to the question of culpability, which follows from a close consideration of the specified facts. In contrast, law school criminal law classes typically feature the use of hypothetical situations ("hypos") that are intended to elicit thought and discussion and that do not have a clear answer. The most familiar of these, at least to me, is "Who killed Abdul?" In the story, Abdul is an Arab who is planning a trip into the desert. Abdul, however, is unpopular, and his enemies know of the planned trip. The night before Abdul is to leave, A surreptitiously replaces the water in Abdul's canteen with wine, which will not be sufficient to keep Abdul alive in the desert. Subsequently, B drains the wine, not noticing that it is not water, and fills the canteen with sand. After this, C empties the canteen, in his haste not noticing that it contained sand and not water. The next morning Abdul goes into the desert with an empty canteen, and he dies there for lack of water. Who killed Abdul? John M Baker (talk) 19:40, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

That one's easy: A did, because he's the one who drained the water. A more interesting version is where X poisoned the water and Y drained it. Abdul died of thirst, but he lived longer than if had drunk the poison. So X's poison did not kill him and Y's action did not shorten his life. Who then is guilty of murder? I say death was accidental and both X and Y are guilty of attempted murder. --76.71.6.254 (talk) 00:20, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Shahid Heydarian Stadium in Qom

In what year did the Shahid Heydarian Stadium in Qom, Iran, open? -- M2545 (talk) 14:57, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hardly being a major stadium (it only hosts 2nd and 3rd division games), I can't locate that info. But the current ownership and management falls under the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (Iran), whose website is at [25]. If you can read Persian, or use google translate, I suppose you can email them, if you really want to know. The other source who might have that info is one of the Qom-based football teams which uses the stadium as their home ground. Sorry I can't be more help, it somewhat surprises me we have an article on the stadium at all, given that it's clearly second-tier, and only holds 3,000. In fact, does it even meet wikipedia notability guidelines? Eliyohub (talk) 17:11, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Takhti Stadium in Qom

In what year did the Takhti Stadium (Qom) in Iran open? -- M2545 (talk) 14:58, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

The Qom Province League would be the ones to address this question to. Not sure how to get their contact info, as I don't read persian. Another largely non-notable stadium, used by the lowest rung of Iranian football. Perhaps the Football Federation Islamic Republic of Iran can give you their contact details, or you can use a persian-language search engine. Eliyohub (talk) 17:15, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Qom railway station

In what year did the Qom railway station in Iran begin operating? -- M2545 (talk) 14:59, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

The line began operating in 1939, apparently? See [26]. Not the best source, perhaps, but I have no reason to doubt it. Diesel locomotive operations to Qom began September 1943 - see out article Trans-Iranian_Railway#US_and_Soviet_operation_1942.E2.80.9345 Eliyohub (talk) 17:21, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

February 16

Biblical truths

Are there ANY?--31.92.250.145 (talk) 01:01, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Define "truth". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:26, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Am I the only one thinking this sounds like some variant of a horribly Loaded question? Eliyohub (talk) 02:11, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

No, you're not. However, I doubt anyone disputes the idea that the later Israelite kings were tributaries of the Assyrians, for example (see the account on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III) or the presence of Assyrian annals discussing the conquest of Samaria by Shalmaneser V and Sargon II, and the sentence beginning with "Indeed" (in Shalmaneser's article) makes it sound as if the cited book is depending on extrabiblical sources for its commentary about the Egyptians. Also see Claudius' expulsion of Jews from Rome and the Lachish Letters (in comparison with Jeremiah 34:7), together with assorted statements about geography and the natural world, e.g. comments about the topography of Palestine in the historical books and the famous Proverbs reference about the ant's diligence in gathering food. Nyttend (talk) 02:16, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

The Babylonian captivity is also generally accepted to have happened. See also Historicity of the Bible. Now, that said, "truth" can have different meanings depending on context. Even non-Christians (for example, Gandhi) have sometimes lauded moral teachings in the Bible, e.g. the Golden Rule and turn the other cheek. For that matter, most Christians don't hold to Biblical inerrancy; not all Christians believe that everything described in the Bible is an actual historical event. If the original questioner could elaborate, we could give more specific answers. --47.138.163.230 (talk) 04:27, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Funeral procession and religion of the decease

• thumb|Funeral of Lunalilo
• thumb|Funeral of Kalakaua

In state funerals of monarchs does the ordering of the clergymen have any symbolism to the decease's religion? In the case of Hawaii, I've noticed in Lunalilo's funeral procession Rev. Parker, a Congregationalist, stands closer to the casket while in Kalakaua's funeral the Anglican bishop stands closer to the casket.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 01:09, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

My guess would be, maybe, but only maybe. It certainly would be possible, like with Richard Nixon, that a minister of a faith not his own, like Billy Graham, might be among his closest friends and get priority of placement in his funeral. There will also be questions as to who is and is not there at any given funeral, possibly for health reasons, having to be elsewhere, etc. Also, I suppose, there may be issues regarding who is considered the "highest ranking" clergy in the procession, so maybe a Catholic archbishop might be before an Anglican bishop even if the decedent were an Anglican. In general, I think you would probably be better off considering who speaks at the funeral as being an indicator of the beliefs of a decedent. John Carter (talk) 01:30, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

And perhaps whose church the service is being held in? Alansplodge (talk) 10:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Authoritarian regimes that are centrist

Is a centrist authoritarian regime possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncle dan is home (talk • contribs) 06:42, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

How do you define "centrist"? And what would be your concept of how a centrist dictator would operate? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:18, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

If you mean an authoritarian regime that does not overtly pursue either a socialist or a conservative agenda, Putin's Russia and Singapore come to mind. However, from the perspective of a Western liberal democracy, any one party state that uses authoritarian means to maintain that system is in one sense by its nature conservative, and therefore right wing, in that it has an active agenda of maintianing a particular political order. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:37, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Deputy representatives in Norwegian parliament

Does anyone know how deputy representatives are selected for Norewgian parliament? The main article at Storting explains how regular representatives come to sit at the Storting (by way of elections), but makes no mention of how deputy reps are selected - whether also by election, like some kind of running mate, or by appointment from the elected rep, or by the party's general choice. I've probably just missed the information someplace obvious but a hand would be great. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 10:06, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

The article you linked says "If a member of parliament cannot serve (for instance because he or she is a member of the cabinet), a deputy representative serves instead. The deputy is the candidate from the same party who was listed on the ballot immediately behind the candidates who were elected in the last election." - Cucumber Mike (talk) 10:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)