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

March 28

scrabble replays

where can i see scrabble replays to see how the masters do it? I wonder what kinds of points they usually score per turn too... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.122.88.10 (talk) 00:26, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Your second question is partially answered in our Scrabble article. I have left a note on the talk page of that article asking for assistance here. Bovlb (talk) 21:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

A couple of suggestions. One is Joe Edley's book "Everything Scrabble". The other is Internet Scrabble Club where you can actually watch live games in progress or view previously played games. Gr8white (talk) 23:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

big buildings in pre-Columbian America

The Aztecs, Maya, and Incas all constructed cities with very large buildings with which nothing north of Mexico compares. What factors might explain this fact? --Halcatalyst (talk) 02:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Agriculture and population density. And of course there were some relatively large buildings and cities north of Mexico (described in some detail in the Mound builder (people) article). Perhaps not comparable to the Aztecs, Mayans, and Incas, but impressive nonetheless. --and also mainly due to agriculture and population density. Pfly (talk) 04:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. This led me to the article on the city Cahokia and the Mississippian people, which was the motive behind my question. A lecturer had mentioned the name of the city, but I hadn't retained it, and I didn't get a chance to ask him this specific question. Thanks again! --12.217.182.50 (talk) 00:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

9/11 Lawsuit

The Cantor Fitzgerald article states: On September 2, 2004, Cantor filed a civil lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, one of a number of organizations to do so.[2] It was later joined in the suit by the Port Authority of New York.[3]

What was the outcome of the lawsuit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.218.4.37 (talk) 03:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

All the lawsuits against Saudi Arabia and members of the Saudi royal family got knocked on the head within a few months, because there are laws in the US that say you can't sue a foreign government. Of course, there are still appeals and wrangling and lawyers-profiting-from-tragedy-ad-nauseum going on, but no actual lawsuit has ever gotten over the first hurdle of finding a court that will hear the case. FiggyBee (talk) 03:45, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson

Although Bill Clinton is presumed to have only "misspoken" when he said that he did not inhale, that he did not have sexual relations with that women and that the events a Waco were Janet Reno's responsibility, did Thomas Jefferson ever make the claim that he did not commit adultery or that in his opinion adultery was not illegal or not wrong? Also, are the offspring resulting from adultery considered illegitimate in Thomas Jefferson's case? Mimus polyglottos (talk) 04:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I read an excellent biography of Jefferson two years ago. If memory serves me well, Jefferson never acknowledged the relationship. I was surprised that the situation was very public. Jefferson was far worse than an adulterer. He had absolute power over Sally Hemmings, the half-sister of his deceased wife. She could not walk away. Choice was not present. One presidential campaign revolved around this relationship. The Sally Hemmings relationship was a larger affair than the Monica Lewinsky matter. Another negative factor that affected his conduct of foreign affairs while he was president was his massive debt, owed to foreign countries. Virginia enacted a state lottery to support him shortly before his death. I was shocked when I read his biography. Elementary school taught me that he was perfect. Of course, he had wonderful traits, too. The biography was a library book so I do not have a copy here to which I can refer. 75Janice (talk) 08:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)75Janice

That's interesting. Jefferson has always been upheld as being ahead of his times, a man who had the foresight to make the Louisiana Purchase. A man who believed the way to eliminate the difference between American Indians and Whites was through interracial marriage. I probably need to read that book. Was the death of Meriwether Lewis mentioned in the book? Mimus polyglottos (talk) 10:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I've always loved Kurt Vonnegut's backhanded compliment of Jefferson where he refers to him as "a leading theorist on the topic of human liberty" (emphasis mine). :) --Sean 15:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and his theories are so well accepted that most people still look forward to a lifestyle based on borrowed money and lotto winnings even today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.15.236 (talk) 20:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Irish short story

I've been trying for several days now to remember the name of an Irish short story I read a couple of years ago. It's nineteenth century I think, and concerns two old men looking for the precise location of an unmarked plot in an overcrowded church yard. Thanks for any prompts. Gifford Jnr (talk) 06:40, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Gifford, this has to be The Weaver's Grave by Seumus O'Kelly. You should note that Cloon na Morav-the Meadow of the Dead-is not attached to a church-yard. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Roger Casement's poem entitled The Nameless One

I'm trying to figure out the meaning of one part of a poem. It was written by Roger Casement some time close to 1900. Most consider this poem to point towards Casement's homosexuality. The whole poem can be found here [1], but I will only copy two stanzas out.

I look beyond the stricken sky

Where sunset paints its hopeless lie;

That way the flaming angel went

That sought by pride love's battlement.

I sought by love alone to go

Where God had writ an awful no.

Pride gave a guilty God to hell

I have no pride--by love I fell.

What is he trying to get at in the third and fourth line of the first stanza? Is it an allusion to Lucifer? What does he mean by "love's battlement"? In the second stanza, what is the meaning of the third line? Does it mean that one who is prideful places all guilt on God and dismisses him, as it were, to hell? I have several other ideas what the meanings could be, but I would be most appreciative if someone had other insights in to the possible meaning of these stanzas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.174.0.10 (talk) 07:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The title seems loaded, too. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

"The love that dares not speak its name"? (When was that published, said she, lazily?) BrainyBabe (talk) 08:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Written in 1892, published in 1894. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Lucifer, yes. "Battlement" is the top of the castle wall; you get there when you've breached the castle's (heaven's) defenses, a sort of victory. The "guilty God" is Lucifer again, quite simply, not the same God as before (this isn't a religious work); his pride was his downfall (to Hell). As for homosexuality, I'd have to say that if he thought he was coming out of the closet with this poem, he needed to try a little harder with his next one. --Milkbreath (talk) 23:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I hardly think he was intending to come out, but the phrase "this love God made, not I" is quite telling. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. This poem was certainly not a "coming out" poem because it wasn't published, or meant to be published, during his lifetime. It was first published by H. Montgomery Hyde, the M.P. for Belfast North in the 1950's who fought for the decriminalization of homosexuality, a position that caused the UUP to eventually reject him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.174.0.10 (talk) 00:07, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

State to first throw 500,000 men into war?

You did a great job on the last question guys. Thanks. Lotsofissues 07:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I would still go with the Achaemenid Empire :) Adam Bishop (talk) 07:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

State to first rule over 1 million people?

So many dates, so many states. This is my attempt to get a better idea of the span of history. Thanks guys for keeping up. Lotsofissues 08:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The problem with this question is that the population of all ancient kingdoms, empires, city states, etc. is a matter for speculation. Most of them had only a rough idea what their own populations were. Having said that, I think there's a scholarly consensus that the population of the Old Kingdom (between about 2575 and 2134 BC) was somewhere between one and two million. Perhaps there are other contenders in Asia? Xn4 08:54, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The first reliable population figures in Chinese history are for the Qin Dynasty (221 BC - 206 BC) which ruled over about 20 million people - though even that figure is fairly rough as it is based on a number of separate figures for various regions of the empire.

The earliest recorded population figure is for the time of Yu the Great of Xia Dynasty (about 2200 BC), which was 13 million - but this first appeared in records long after the Xia Dynasty, and so is fairly unreliable. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

philosophy

bacon seems to challenge three kinds of what he calls false philosophy;"the sohistical,the emperical and the superstitious" why and how does he consider all three to corrupt philosophy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.128.0.118 (talk) 10:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

You may be interested in the following paragraph from the Francis Bacon article:

Bacon did not propose an actual philosophy, but rather a method of developing philosophy; he wrote that, whilst philosophy at the time used the deductive syllogism to interpret nature, the philosopher should instead proceed through inductive reasoning from fact to axiom to law. Before beginning this induction, the inquirer is to free his mind from certain false notions or tendencies which distort the truth. These are called "Idols" (idola), and are of four kinds: "Idols of the Tribe" (idola tribus), which are common to the race; "Idols of the Den" (idola specus), which are peculiar to the individual; "Idols of the Marketplace" (idola fori), coming from the misuse of language; and "Idols of the Theatre" (idola theatri), which result from an abuse of authority. The end of induction is the discovery of forms, the ways in which natural phenomena occur, the causes from which they proceed.

AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 13:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, sophistry (sohistical?) is false reasoning; empiricism restricts reasoning to example; and superstition is the negation of reason. All militate against purer forms of philosophical thought. Clio the Muse (talk) 04:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Scotland and the Wars of the Roses

Here's an interesting question to which I have not yet found a definite answer. In the fifteenth century England was severely weakened by a prolonged period of upheaval that we now know as the Wars of the Roses. Considering the poor relations between England and Scotland ever since the Wars of Independence this was clearly an ideal time for the Scots to take advantage of the military and political weakness of their erstwhile powerful southern neighbour. So, to what extent did the Scots seek to exploit the situation in England for their own benefit? Clio, can you help me with this? Hamish MacLean (talk) 11:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Well to put it bluntly: they didn't. Though you may find this information interesting: Margaret of Anjou actually travelled to Scotland to negotiate for the assistance of the Scottish. The Queen of Scots, Mary of Gueldres agreed to give Margaret military aid on the condition that she cede the town of Berwick to Scotland and Mary's daughter be betrothed to Prince Edward (Margaret's son). Margaret agreed. Her was defeated at the Battle of Tewkesbury where her son died. Berwick ceded to Scotland. Hope you found that helpful or at least interesting... --Cameron (t/c) 16:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I feel a pantomime oh, yes, they did coming on here! The short answer, Hector, is that the Scots attempted to exploit the troubles in England, whenever they were in a position to do so. I would ask you to pay particular attention to the emphasis here; for more often than not during the whole period of The Wars of the Roses the Scots were beset by their own problems, arising, first, from a royal minority, and second, by the political problems caused by an unpopular king.

So, here are the simple facts. No sooner had James II heard of the death of Henry Percy, 2nd Earl of Northumberland, the keeper of the northern march, at the First Battle of St Albans in 1455 than he ordered an attack on the English-held town of Berwick, in defiance of a prevailing truce. The attack was repulsed on this occasion, though James remained alter to the possibilities for renewed aggression, attacking the Isle of Man, a former Scottish possession, the following year. He also wrote to Charles VII of France in 1455, suggesting a co-ordinate attack on Calais and Berwick. Though Charles declined the offer, James continued to press his attacks, ravaging the county of Northumberland in 1456. His campaign came to a climax in 1460, when he laid siege to Roxburgh Castle, held by the English ever since the conclusion of the Scottish Wars of Independence. The castle was taken, though James was killed when one of his cannons exploded.

The succession of the eight-year-old James III brought a contest in the Scottish government between those who wished to continue the campaign of the dead king and those anxious for peace. The Queen Mother, Mary of Guelders, was reluctant to pursue a fresh adventure, though she was persuaded to enter into an alliance with Margaret of Anjou after hearing of the death of Richard, Duke of York at the Battle of Wakefield in December 1460. Scots auxiliaries then joined the Lancastrian army, advancing to defeat the Yorkists at the Second Battle of St Albans. But Margaret's wild northern host only served to alarm the south still further, galvanising people behind Edward IV, who subjected his enemy to a devastating defeat at the Battle of Towton.

With Edward secure on the throne-and the government of James III divided on policy and tactics-there was no further possibility for some time for interference in English affairs, though the unsettled situation in the north allowed the Scots to retain Berwick. When James took charge of affairs in his own right he proved more interested in peace than war. In the end tensions between James and his own nobility was to allow the English to take the initiative, particularly in the brief war of 1482, when Richard Duke of York, Edward's brother, recaptured Berwick. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Superb, Clio. I knew I could rely on you. Why not come and teach history in one of our great Scottish universities? You would be valued. Hamish MacLean (talk) 07:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I thank you, Hamish; but Clio is fully committed! Clio the Muse (talk) 23:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Letters of Danish parties

The List of political parties in Denmark links a letter to each party. A for Social Democrats, B for Danish Social Liberal Party and C for Conservative People's Party etc. Could some one explain how these letters are used, in the media, by the parties, in the electoral system? - C mon (talk) 11:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC) (on behalf of user:free socialist, who asked the same question here)

After searching: "The Standing Orders of the Folketing, it looks like these are designations for the parliamentary groups rather than the parties themselves ("The groups...are referred to in the Folketing by a designation decided by the group, and the Speaker will decide on an abbreviation of this designation not exceeding 3 letters..."). The party names seem to be abbreviated more conventionally, e.g. SD for Social Democrats.—eric 20:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Based on da:Partibogstav and de:Parteibuchstabe (Dänemark): Single-letter designations identify political partes on ballots and political posters, and usually don't correspond to the abbreviations of the parties' names, which are used in the press etc. Such letters were used for the first time in 1901. The designations that are used today were chosen in the parlamentary elections in 1943, based on the size of the parties in Copenhagen. The use of these letters is regulated by the Law of parlamentary elections, §14. The Minister of internal affairs assigns a letter to each party, which is to be shown on its ballot. Letters should be assigned such that they whenever possible correspond to the letters that have been used in previous elections. Iceland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands use a similar system. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 22:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

IQ and career success

A psychologist today told me IQ isn't very strongly connected to the ability to achieve distinction in a career. Is that right? NeonMerlin 17:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

See Intelligence quotient#Income. It looks like a yes. Algebraist 18:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks like it is only a minor factor, yes. Wrad (talk) 18:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

In fact it might even be a negative factor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.15.236 (talk) 20:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The cynic in me might suggest that being a 'shameless self publicist' is strongly connected to acchieving distinction. Though I'd say yes - though note the difference between 'distinction' and other measures of success such as income - you might not even get any credit until after you are dead...87.102.16.238 (talk) 21:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

People of low IQ who are organized, hard working, determined and good at achieving rapport with and gaining respect from other generally go very far in life. But when it comes to difficult verbal or mathematical challenges, they just don't "get it." Having rich and/or connected relatives helps a lot. Edison (talk) 00:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Exhibit A: George W. Bush. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this guy "organized, hard working, determined"?Mr.K. (talk) 05:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Notice the indentation. I was referring to the original question. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

If you read the IQ article over and over, you may start to understand it a little. IQ was developed to identify how well students will do in school in the future. For example, how well will a current first grader do in school in the second, third, fourth, and fifth grades? It was not a test of intelligence. It was a test of schooling aptitude. It was altered to be a quotient without the purpose being changed. Then, since it only applied to school children, it was adapted to be relative to a value of 100 for the mean population of any certain age - which changed the purpose, but not the test. So, if you are 30 and you take the IQ test, you are taking a test of how well you will do in school and your score will be above 100 if you do better than the average 30 year old and below 100 if you do worse than the average 30 year old. Because it is not a test of artistic ability, singing ability, driving ability, running ability, or anything else other than schooling ability, it cannot be considered a test for how well a person will do at anything other than school. The funny thing is that children with high IQs that are given normal schooling tend to do very poorly in school (such as Einstein). So, even there it contradicts itself. -- kainaw™ 03:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with your unsourced claim that high IQ students do poorly with "normal schooling." Actually, cream rises to the top, even in poor schools. Edison (talk) 02:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Einstein was an excellent student. Especially in math and science, as you would expect. The idea that he wasn't is a myth based on a misinterpretation of old school records. APL (talk) 03:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Although I don't remember if he got good or bad grades. Einstein always clashed with the authority figures at school and resented the fact that there was so much rote learning involved in being a good pupil at school.Mr.K. (talk) 05:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Einstein got excellent grades. It is commonly reported that he did poorly, which I think is based on the fact that his later high school years were spent in one country (Austria?) that used a number grading system opposite to that of the country he had previously lived in (Germany?), ie one country graded 1-6 with 6 as the highest, the other with 1 as the highest. Or something like that. --superioridad ^(discusión) 12:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Einstein attended school in Munich (the Luitpold Gymnasium) and later in Aarau and Zurich, both in Switzerland.

Our article on grade (education) implies that 1..5 (top to fail) is common in Europe and is used in Germany. The Swiss system is 6..1 (top to fail) and thus the reverse. I could not find a reference which makes it clear if these opposing systems were already used at the end of the 19th century. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 13:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I have heard both versions several times: one group affirms that Einstein got good grades and that it is a myth that he was a bad pupil at school and other group that says exactly the contraty. I still have not found a primary source that corroborate any version. Furthermore I also ask myself if Einstein was a good student at university. I remember some anecdotal evidence about one teacher of him asking if the Einstein that got famous was the same that sat on his lectures. Mr.K. (talk) 13:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, my definition of "do poorly in school" is not the same as other people's definition. I do not mean to imply that Einstein got bad grades. I meant to imply that he did not do well with the daily process of repeating things that he already learned while waiting painfully for the class to catch up. This is not limited to Einstein because it doesn't take a genius to have this experience. I do not consider myself a genius, but I do learn very quickly. So, I graduated school with perfect grades. However, I spent half of my time in detention for causing problems in class. By some definitions, I did not do poorly because of my grades. By mine, I did poorly because I couldn't be assimilated into the public school system. -- kainaw™ 14:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you about the two definitions of "do poorly in school" - don't fit or get bad grades. I know that Einstein didn't fit well at school and at the university, but I still miss a reliable source about his grades. I wouldn't say he was a fast learner. I always believed that he got hanged on some minor points and thought more detailedly about things that others took for granted. Apparently his job as a patent lawyer after graduation was rather a modest occupation, obtained through a friend. He was actually after a teaching position. This fact suggests that possibly his grades were not exceptional. Mr.K. (talk) 19:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The Einstein biography by Pais, Subtle is the Lord, presents grades at various stages of Einstein's educational career.  --Lambiam 23:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

This seems to be both theoretical and relative. There must be a memorable catch phrase for this all which people will know without knowing anything about it, neither general ly nor special ly... --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:20, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I would just call it a hypothesis or hypothetical. I have also asked myself if the myth was that Einstein was good at school (concerning grades or 'fitness') or that indeed he got good grades. Due to the huge amount of fake quotes of Einstein and perhaps even more people backing their arguments with him, I suppose the hole topic must be rife with urban legends. See here. WikiWiking (talk) 20:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The only thing doing well in an IQ test proves is how good the person is at IQ tests. 'Intelligence' is a minefield. Doing well in an IQ test is arguably completely dependant on a persons experiance, particularly education, rather than latent 'intelligence'. For example someone who has had no formal education will fail any IQ test questions relating to mathematics. Does this mean they are inherantly less 'intelligent' than someone who has been taught maths? Of course not. They are less knowledgable, but not less intelligent. With regards to achieving distinction in a career, it will obviously vary regarding what your career is. For example one could achieve distiction in the field of modeling despite having no intelligence or education. Whereas achieving distinction in quantam physics would require both. If achieving distinction equates to earning a lot of money, remember that your income is determined by the supply of and demand for your skills, and nothing else, certainly not your IQ score. Willy turner (talk) 22:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I have read funny articles by persons of moderate intelligence who complain about standardized tests, and quote a question and the possible answers, and question how anyone can state that the "correct" answer is better than the others. Then persons with greater IQ are quite able to explain why the "correct " answer actually is the right one. Edison (talk) 02:35, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't know why this example reminds me of the mad Hatter's riddle, but it does. Maybe it's the arbitrariness and cultural specificity of iq tests. Julia Rossi (talk) 03:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Missing vessels

There is a List of shipwrecks that have been located. Is there a list of missing vessels (ship or aircraft) whose wreck (assumed so after long disappearance or known destruction) that has never been located? --Kvasir (talk) 21:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

How about Category:Disappeared ships? Bovlb (talk) 22:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Awesome thanks! I will start a list. Anything on aircraft? --Kvasir (talk) 00:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't rush to create a list if a category is sufficient. You might be better putting the work into making sure the categories are complete and consistent. There's at least one aircraft under Category:Unexplained disappearances and you could poke around in Category:Aviation accidents and incidents. You'll find more ships under Category:Mysteries. The trick is to find examples, and see what categories they're in. Bovlb (talk) 03:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

March 29

Floating Castles

Does anyone know where that image of a castle floating in the sky on a chunk of earth came from? An example can be found at http://www.geocities.com/yekante/Castle.jpg 70.55.145.239 (talk) 02:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe it came from the idiomatic "castle in the air" or "castle in the sky" for lofty plans that will never happen. I don't know who first painted it, couldn't find it among Bruegel's famous painted Netherlandish Proverbs but one famous examples is M. C. Escher's Castle in the Air. Related examples, though without floating islands of rock or earth, are Maxfield Parrish's Air Castles, The Dinky Bird and Dream Castle in the Sky. Speaking of which, see also Laputa and floating island. ---Sluzzelin talk 02:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

There is a (fortified) cloud city in The Birds by Aristophanes, perhaps that is the origin? Adam Bishop (talk) 04:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. See also cloud cuckoo land and cloudcuckooland. ---Sluzzelin talk 06:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

For Sci-Fi examples, see also the article on Floating city (science fiction). Here is a juxtaposition of Flash Gordon 's "Cloud City" and Cloud City in The Empire Strikes Back . ---Sluzzelin talk 09:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

See also Tripura (mythology). --Dr Dima (talk) 14:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

René Magritte also did some - see [2]. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

George Bluth Sr. had this idea years ago.[3]--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 23:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

In considering this I immediately thought of Laputa from Gulliver's Travels, but I see that Sluzzelin has already covered that. Pushing my mind further back-back even further than Aristophanes-it occurs to me that the Babylonian Tale of Ahiqar may have some relevance here. This tells of a flight into the air to build a tower. The Life of Aesop, a later Greek text, takes up this theme. In this Aesop returns from exile to assist Alexander the Great in his desire to build a tower in the sky. He does so by harnessing four boys to four eagles, allowing them to be carried upwards with their bricklayer's equipment. They then start to build a wall in the air.

The Ahiqar story was widely known among the Jewish and Arab communities in the Middle East, and appears again in the work of Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, the Persian historian and thinker, who describes the assistance of the devs (beneficial spirits) in building a castle in the air. It appears again the Shahnameh, Ferdowsi's great Persian epic.

Having said all that, 70.55, your particular anime-like castle in the sky may very well owe its inspiration to, well, the Castle in the Sky! Clio the Muse (talk) 01:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

war poems

What is a good website that explains the themes, meaning etc of poem such as the soldier by rupert brooke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.90.65.15 (talk) 02:39, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

118.90, there is really no substitute for reading the poems yourself. I would have thought that Rupert Brooke's moving verses in The Soldier hardly need further gloss or explanation.

If I should die, think only this of me:

That there's some corner of a foreign field

That is forever England... Clio the Muse (talk) 00:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

And, of course, Rupert Brooke did die in 1915, as his ship approached Gallipoli, and is buried on Skyros. His death adds poignancy to the poem. Have a look at the Rupert Brooke Society. BrainyBabe (talk) 19:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I think this is a good page 20TH CENTURY POETRY AND WAR. I set the link to already point to a poem and its explanation. If you after reading it need further information on its background topic then look here. Cheers --Stor stark7 ^Talk 20:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values

What is the philosophical value of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values? Is this book studied at academic institutions? Mr.K. (talk) 04:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• Probably somewhere down there with Jonathan Livingston Seagull. Seriously, Pirsig was more mystic than philosopher, and his thinking would probably not be taken all that seriously in academic philosophical circles; it wasn't really academic in nature, and not particularly analytic, and generally outside the programme of academic philosophical research during the years of its popularity. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Jonathan Livingston Seagull seems much more the work of an insane mind that Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values. Pirsig was at least an academic philosopher - of halfway one. Do mainstream academic philosophy doesn't integrate/consider/absorb works produced outside academic circles? Mr.K. (talk) 19:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Agitprop

What is this picture in reference to? --superioridad ^(discusión) 08:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The text says "Entente - under the mask of piece [I meant to write 'peace']". The Allies of World War I were called the "Entente Powers" and also after that war, until about 1940, the word Entente was often used for the alliance between France and Britain. The image is from 1920, so it most likely refers to the support by these countries for the White Movement during the Russian Civil War. DAVID ŠENEK 09:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The direct transliteration Антанта - "Entente" - means the Triple Entente. The poster seems to be a reminder that Russia's erstwhile allies, despite pulling out of the civil war and making overtures of peace, are still capitalists at heart and should not be trusted. FiggyBee (talk) 11:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Updated

And the word on the mask: 'МИР' (Mir)? What does this mean? --superioridad ^(discusión) 23:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Peace. It's an illustration of supposed hypocrisy. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:49, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

You can also check мир in Wiktionary, our sister project. - Saludos, Ev (talk) 01:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

There could also be a play on words involved here. Мир also means "a/the world". In the pre-revolutionary orthography, the words for "peace" and "world" were spelled slightly differently, but now they're spelled the same, thus introducing a potential for misinterpretation and word play that didn't exist previously. (The pronunciations have always been the same; the spelling change didn't alter that.) The poster could be a conveying a sense that the world is a pretty ugly place and it has to pretend to be more pleasant (with peace conferences, ententes etc) to be able to live with itself. Hence the entente referred to is being depicted as window dressing. If I had a face like that, I'd wear a mask too. Interesting to reflect on the entire world having a persona, not just individual people having them. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Given what David says above, it makes more sense for the word to be meaning "peace" here, though. Note that the word is written on the mask, not the face. --Anonymous, 03:00 UTC, March 30, 2008.

True. I was just idly musing on a mellow autumnal Sunday afternoon. Still, I wonder what the grotesque face was meant to represent. -- JackofOz (talk) 03:07, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It depicts the treachery and perfidy of the 'capitalist' powers, hiding behind the mask of peace. The theme is repeated time and again in Soviet propaganda, with the bloated capitalist almost invariably wearing a top hat. Clio the Muse (talk) 03:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Is he supposed to be Jewish? He looks somewhat like Nazi cartoons of Jews. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, there's no give-away hooked nose. -- JackofOz (talk) 07:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

No, not Jewish; merely a vicious, dehumanised plutocrat! The Nazi Jewish caricatures almost always emphasise the same physical features: a hooked-nose, heavily lidded eyes, a receding chin and thick lips. There is, however, some later convergence, as you will discover, Adam, if you look at the illustrations here - 11k. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Patrona Halil

can i know any more about Patrona Haili rebellion in Ottoman Empire? what impact had it? Enver M (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 10:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The chief effect of Patrona Halil's uprising, Enver, was to force the Ottoman authorities into ever deeper forms of social conservatism. The uprising was blamed on migrant Albanians, like Patrona Halil himself, so further migration from the western Balkans was severely restricted. Mahmud I issued decrees aimed at keeping all provincials out of Istanbul, though in practice these proved difficult to enforce. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:44, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Law question: title of party

Hi,
I'm writing about a criminal case (heard in the Magistrates Court, Melbourne) involving an application to return objects seized by the Victorian Police. The Applicant is self represented and the other party is the Victorian Police (I'm not really sure as it wasn't made explicit during the hearing but it must be) represented by solicitor. My question is what do you address the other party as? Are they the respondent/defendant/prosecutor? Thanks! --Fir0002 11:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Plaintiff brings the case against another party. Defendant or respondent is the accused party. Julia Rossi (talk) 12:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Seems like this is just a motion to return evidence. In this case the plaintiff is the person that brings the motion (or makes the complaint) and the defendant is the respondant who is opposing the motion. Rfwoolf (talk) 12:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The opposite of an "Applicant" is a "Respondent". If it is an application under a statute, then it would most likely be Applicant-Respondent. If it's a tortious action, then plaintiff-defendant. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 04:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Dance in UAE

For the people who come from U.A.E. and had seen this dance: What is the name of this dance, why is it bad to watch and where can you get these videos from, meaning which website? by the way, I am not a Muslim. Here are some videos:[[4]], [[5]],[[6]], and [[7]]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Mustafa (talk • contribs) 13:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Why some of you aren't answering my question?

Somalis in Bangladesh

Is it true that there are Somalis living in Bangladesh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Mustafa (talk • contribs) 13:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

As per http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3452.htm "In recent years ... Bangladeshi troops have served or are serving in Sierra Leone, Somalia, ..."

Reference http://www.opendemocracy.net/conflict-africa_democracy/article_1519.jsp mentions the particularly friendly terms which were established between Bangladesh UN troops and the warring Somalis.

As Bagladesh and Somalia share their religion, the Islam, it may be possible that some Somalis married soldiers or somehow established business connections which permitted an immigration to Bangladesh.

On a tangent, the Guardian on http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/jan/23/britishidentity.features11 reports that there is a community of a few thousand Somalis around Cardiff in Wales. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Philosophy: career options

If one is interested in philosophy and wants to study it in college, what would one do as a career? One cannot simply be a philosopher nowadays. Is majoring in philosophy alone a wise decision? Are there people out there who hire philosophers to think of something for them? Am i hyperbolizing the term philosophy as it applies to today? Thanks very much, schyler (talk) 14:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

You are right, being a philosopher is not a career, but, philosophy is a still a valued degree in certain fields such as government, you could lecture, some businesses view the degree in the same way as a Bachelor of Art - and in this way you would be eligible for many positions that simply require a degree. Rfwoolf (talk) 14:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Academic philosophy is a perfectly valid career, though there aren't that many jobs available. Algebraist 14:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Well there are two paths that I know of. First you could be a professor in the academe or you could use your BA in Philosophy as a background for studying Law. --Lenticel ^(talk) 14:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

You could also become an actress with a record number of Oscars, or a comedian with a Mark Twain Prize for American Humor. ---Sluzzelin talk 14:57, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

In other languages, Russian and Hebrew, to name but to, philosophy is considered a scientific discipline. The Russian term is nauka, the Hebrew has mada'ei haruach (sciences of the spirit). AllenHansen (talk) 13:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Or another (ludicrously over-rated) award winning comedian. Ooh have we found a connection between philosophy and comedy? - discuss? Willy turner (talk) 22:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it's a damn shame there aren't professional philosophers. Many health issues could be solved by your GP referring you to your local consultant philosopher. You'd get so involved in discussing being and nothingness that you'd forget all about your paltry medical problems and start to see the world in an entirely different light. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, JackofOz is referring to the WP:RD staff. The services of this institution (which, in dire circumstances, may save your sanity, unless you have lost it already and "work" here) are refundable via NHS / Medicare / whatever you call it

In exceptional circumstances it may happen that you leave our surgery with increased symptoms of lunacy. In this case, join our merry circle in the daily group therapy. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 00:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

What's the matter? Never mind. What's to mind? Never matter. Anyway, schyler, my advice to anyone considering a philosophy option would be to go with your interests and instincts. Thinking about thinking is surely no better basis for a fulfilling professional and personal life. It should equip one for almost anything! Clio the Muse (talk) 00:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

'Anything' here means probably nothing. As a philosopher you can teach other philosopher or you can become a dubious professional in airy fields like success consulting, intercultural consulting or motivational speaker. WikiWiking (talk) 00:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

On the contrary; anything here means almost everything. An educated mind is always an asset. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that philosophy 'educates your mind'. At least not more than science does. As a matter of fact, studying philosophy at university is just studying the history of philosophy - a ratter tiny part of the intellectual achievements of humankind. If you really want to educate your mind go for maths and you will learn the basic structure of everything. WikiWiking (talk) 02:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, that's fine; I'm more than happy to leave you with maths, while I continue in my devotion to that 'ratter' tiny part of the mind! I do not mean to be unkind, WikiWiking, but it is patently obvious that you know next to nothing about academic philosophy. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I have met more than one philosopher and 'appreciated' more than one lecture. I can only confirm what I have said: academic philosophy is in a terrible shape, it resembles in nothing the great achievements of the past, and there is nothing into it that can be respected. The whole field is full of toffee-nosed pretentious charlatans. Professionally you can become a teacher or a clown (success consulting, intercultural consulting or motivational speaker and the like). My best advise: learn something about how the world works. Go for maths if you are interested in abstract thinking and understanding a lot of phenomena. WikiWiking (talk) 03:17, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I can only speak from personal experience here. The philosophy courses at my university are well-organised and well-conducted. Clio the Muse (talk) 04:17, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

First you pretend you know something about what is going on in academic philosophy. Later you disclose that you meant only your university. What about following basic laws of thought? A mathematician would hardly make such mistakes. Modern 'philosophers' are always keen to defend their 'superior' intellectual capacities, but only through drivel and never through example. WikiWiking (talk) 04:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

We really have no more to say to each other. I take your hostility towards philosophy as read, and will leave it at that. Clio the Muse (talk) 04:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Please, don't decide for me if I have no more to say. If I feel like saying something to you I will do it. WikiWiking (talk) 06:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Colin McGinn gives a portrait of the professional life of an academic philosopher in his autobiographical memoir The Making of a Philosopher. He makes it sound quite cannibalistic, but probably no more so than the upper echelons of any profession. Gandalf61 (talk) 09:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

In some professions it is easier to prove that you are right. Mathematicians live from proofs. Engineers from problem-solving. Drivel producers live from prestige and therefore are more inclined to attack other members of the same profession. And that is exactly what makes them despicable. WikiWiking (talk) 10:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

(Un-indent). Let us stop the mud slinging. This is the humanities desk and not the WP:Kindergarten. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 13:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Katie Cruel

I've been having a devil of a time finding information about the original sources of this traditional folk song. Probably, the most well known recording of it is by Karen Dalton. Are there alternative titles I should be looking for? - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I can't trace any sources, but there's an earlier (and surely better) version of the lyrics here. Diddle-ay, oh diddle-i o-day. Xn4 15:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

"Katie Cruel" originated in New England in colonial times, and has been sung there continuously from the eighteenth century until today. Colonial militiamen used it as a marching song; children sang it as a jingle and speeded the tempo to a skipping pace; for women it was either a lullaby or a lament that captured well the dreaming loneliness and pain of love.

Scott, J. A. (1967). The ballad of America: the history of the United States in song and story. New York: Grosset & Dunlap. pp. 50-2. OCLC 213782149. There's some lyrics, and a snippet of sheet music from: Linscott, E. H. (1962). Folk songs of old New England. OCLC 165637186. I'll email 'em if you'd like.—eric 16:52, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Managed to find the Linscott version, and I should have the Scott book on the way next time I am at the loan desk. Also found a Scottish parallel / likely original. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 18:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Murdered Greek actress Eleni Papadaki, denounced by envious rival?

I recently saw a documentary on Maria Callas, in which one of the interviewees claimed that Callas had to flee Greece at the end of the war to avoid the fate of the celebrated actress Eleni Papadaki, who was murdered in December 1944 by Communists accusing her of having collaborated with the Germans.

When I tried to look her up on Wikipedia, there was no entry for Eleni Papadaki in English or any other language I could read. Searching for her name in Latin script gives only a few hits on Google or Google Books. When I first searched, a few weeks ago, even the Greek Wikipedia did not have an article on her. But her name gets 13,000 Google hits in Greek, so there seems to be material out there. Now, the Greek Wikipedia has an article, as somebody added one since I searched for her last time. (Isn't that a coincidence? The Greek Wikipedia has languished for years with no article on one of the apparently most famous 20th century Greek actresses, and just a couple of weeks after some random foreigner looks in vain for an article about her, somebody writes one...)

Using a Babelfish translation of the Greek Wikipedia article as my starting point, I have made an attempt to write an article on Eleni Papadaki, but it is pretty incomplete. (Bonus piece of trivia: Oscar Wilde transliterated to Greek and then re-transliterated by Babelfish back into English becomes "O'skar Goya'jlnt"?)

As for my actual question: According to the interview in the documentary I mentioned, Papadaki was denounced by a rival actress, envious of her success. A snippet I can see on Google Books from André Gerolymatos, Red Acropolis, Black Terror (from 2004, ISBN 0465027431) indicates that her rival was surnamed Economou [8] Does anyone know more of this particular Greek drama? Who was the rival actress? What happened to her later? (Gerolymatos's book is not easily available to me, or I would look it up there.)

Anyone knowing Greek and familiar with modern Greek theatre or interested in the history of the Greek Civil War should feel encouraged to improve the Papadaki article. Without expert help, I suspect that my modest attempt will make somebody conclude that she is undeserving of the honour of a Wikipedia page and fill the top of the page with little rectangular boxes. Olaus (talk) 14:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

1974 Jazz organist/keyboardist

Can anyone tell me who the keyboardist/hammond organist? that performed on Billy Cobham's '74 record Crosswinds is? Jan Hammer performed with him on the previous album, but I can't figure out if it could be Brian Auger, or someone completely different. Conveniently, his website isn't working properly either, which sucks. Specifically, I'm wondering about the track Heather (YouTube link). Would that be a Hammond, or some other keyboard? I can't really tell. Thanks in advance!  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  16:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's George Duke. Can't listen to the YouTube link right now, sorry. ---Sluzzelin talk 16:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I've just checked his homepage and it appears that you're right! Thank you! I wonder what he was playing; doesn't say that he's ever played a hammond organ.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  17:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

... and I now just checked the beginning of your clip; the intro is played on a Rhodes piano. (Good to see you back at the desks, by the way!) ---Sluzzelin talk 17:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I listened to some more. The prominent electric piano sound is a Rhodes for certain. The atmospheric background sounds like it could be an ARP 2600, though that's merely a guess. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's definitely it, thank you so much. Such a beautiful, unique sound, I won't forget that.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  04:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hillary: The Movie

Why no one in the campaign is discussing about this film? Googling does not help much. No wikipedia article on this movie. Thanks, Slmking (talk) 21:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC) Slmking

Because it's not very notable? I'm not sure it satisfies Wikipedia's notability requirements for films. It has not been distributed widely, it is not old enough to be historically notable, it hasn't won an award, was not selected for preservation in an archive, and is not taught as a subject at an academic institution. (Maybe someday it will be notable, but at the moment it looks like a—boring—partisan hit piece, which are a dime a dozen in an election year this day and age.) --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 21:52, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Did Nazis execute old people??

I love reading about the Third Reich and its people. I have read here and on Spanish wikipedia that Nazis executed homosexuals, lesbians, black people, Gypsies, Jews, Communists, physically and mentally handicapped people, etc, etc. But I need to know. Did they execute old people? thanks and kisses from ArGenTina!. 201.254.75.4 (talk) 21:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Not specifically because they were old, no, unless they fell into one of those other categories. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 21:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Murder is, I think, a better word in this context, 201.254, than 'execute'. Yes, they murdered thousands of old people, but only, as Captain Reference Desk says, if they fell under some of the particular headings you have identified. I'm not sure, though, if it is correct to say that they specifically targeted black people as such. The so-called Rhineland Bastards were forcibly sterilized, it is certainly true, though they were not incarcerated or murdered. Other black Germans managed to live through the period in relative peace. Also, I think it would be more exact to say that gays, lesbians and Communists were sent to concentration camps for their 'offences', rather than targeted for murder in the same fashion as the Jews and the Gypsies eventually were. Of course, many died there, but that was not necessarily the chief aim. I hope you will understand that it is important to make these distinctions. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Name of song

I saw an old movie about the battle of the Bulge where the German tank commanders sang some kind of marching song. Does anyone know what it is called? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yes, I believe it (talk • contribs) 21:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

According to IMDb trivia and our very own article, it's "Panzerlied". Clarityfiend (talk) 22:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Here it is [9]. It's really quite stirring; so turn up the volume and stamp your feet! And there is no need to feel guilty if you like it. There is no mention at all of the Nazis! I've also managed to find the Battle of the Bulge version [10], though here all they do is repeat the first verse over and over. Clio the Muse (talk) 23:57, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Legal systems

Are there any legal systems anywhere in the World which publish the law in the form of a dichotomous key? 71.100.5.4 (talk) 23:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The federal law of Switzerland is indexed with an hierarchical decimal key. For instance, 6 - finance law, 64 - tax law, 641.41 - beer tax law and so on (http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/index.html). I imagine many countries use a similar system. Sandstein (talk) 01:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the lookup but unfortunately that is not what I mean. What I am looking for is on the order of a flowchart or multiple state truth table in the form of a polychotomous key where the dependent variables are the list of actions defined by law and the independent variables are the conditions by which the actions are defined. 71.100.5.4 (talk) 02:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

No, as far as I know – I'm a Continental European jurist – all contemporary law is written in prose, and not in the sort of formal notation you describe. Law is supposed to be understandable by everybody, after all. Sandstein (talk) 07:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

"Law is supposed to be understandable by everybody, after all." My point exactly. Perhaps you have never used what is otherwise known as a troubleshooting chart. Applied to the law they would make your job and everyone else involved with the legal system much easier. Of course, creation of troubleshooting charts might mean your licience to steal would not be able to get away with as much arm twisting. No offence intended —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.0.130 (talk) 09:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Legal texts can be poetic. About 10 years ago, a county judge in Ohio ruled the state's school-funding systems violated the state constitution by not insuring enough money for poor schools. In his decision, the judge included the entirety of the poem "The Road Not Taken." That's what happens when judges are elected. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 07:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

In that vein, see the decision in Fisher v. Lowe. Algebraist 12:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

An apt appellate response to a frivolous law suit which would have failed to reach the court had a troubleshooting chart been used. Say all: There is no liability, since No-Fault grants immunity and there is no jurisdiction. 71.100.5.4 (talk) 12:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to presume the case wouldn't have reached court were a troubleshooting chart used. Why are you sure that the plantiff and his or her lawyer wasn't already aware that their law suit was without merit and were just hoping they would get lucky? Nil Einne (talk) 18:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The ratio of actual cost to the potential of reward in absence of a new variable not yet included in statutory or case law. Hence, the need to retain the judicial system. Following consideration of a new variable by the court an online troubleshooting chart for case law is very easily updated and ready for the next case. 71.100.5.4 (talk) 17:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

March 30

Holocaust denial

Hello. What's the deal with holocaust deniers? Is it normally assumed that they privately believe in the holocaust or that they are genuinely deluded? 90.203.189.60 (talk) 00:10, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

There's actually a Wikipedia article on it which is illuminating somewhat: Holocaust denial. The most common story I hear is that it is a hoax inspired by a Jewish conspiracy. x42bn6 Talk Mess 00:13, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

In political terms it is most often the defining characteristic of Neo-Nazism. Take away the Holocaust-a uniquely awful event in world history-then it almost possible to 'normalise' the Nazi state. There is a perverse logic at work, though; the Jews, for these people, still remain the chief enemy, which leaves open the question what is to be done with such monsters. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

If you think that is perverse logic at work consider the belief of the Aryan Brotherhood that because Adolph Hitler was descended from a Jew that the Nazi party was from its very inception part of an International Jewish conspiracy or Jewish agenda which was in this case to "...reign over..." the earth as prescribed by God in the Book of Genesis, Chapter 1, Verse 26, of the Old Testament on the basis of being the "chosen people" where any non-chosen people such as the gentiles or their organizations, governments etc. are considered to be no different than the "...fish in the sea...," "...birds in the sky...," "...all the wild [and domestic] animals on the Earth..." Thus, the Aryan Brotherhood located within the CA State Prison of LA County (and documented by the Bible Baptist Prison Miniseries in nearby Tehachapi, CA) believes that the whole Nazi episode was merely a means for the Jews to wrestle control away from the Prussian (German) State so that the Jews might one day reign over it (Germany). In 1947 the Allied Occupation Forces declared the Prussian State abolished . 71.100.0.187 (talk) 03:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I see someone attempted to advance that view here while I was away! Clio the Muse (talk) 04:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It gets better, it's also suppose to be the true agenda of, you guessed it, Christianity. 71.100.0.187 (talk) 04:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not a neo-nazi. However, he is one of the most popular Holocaust deniers. He denies it because of hatred towards Israel. If he really hates Israel or denies the Holocaust on a personal level is unknown. He is a politician and says anything required to be elected. -- kainaw™ 01:22, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

See Arthur Butz and The Hoax of the Twentieth Century. Edison (talk) 02:27, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It's all about making the world fit their worldview. 9/11 conspiracy people can't accept that George Bush's America was a victim and non-Europeans perpetrators, so they try to twist facts to eliminate the cognitive dissonance. "Scientific creationists" won't accept natural history that doesn't follow their narrow interpretation of the Bible. Holocaust deniers are almost without exception antisemites who refuse to believe that Jews could be innocent victims of "Aryan" Europeans, so they invent an alternate history in which that isn't the case. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

This comic somewhat sums it up. As for whether they are genuine or not, I don't generally doubt that most Holocaust deniers genuinely believe it is a big conspiracy by the Jews. It's not like it is totally outside the realm of possibility to imagine that the scale of atrocities has been exaggerated, even though I think the evidence against such a view is conclusive. That is, I have a very hard time believing that anyone can truly believe that the earth is truly flat and that there are massive, worldwide conspiracies to make people think that it is a globe; but Holocaust denial seems like just the sort of pernicious lie that people could sign on to whole-hog. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 16:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Judaica

It makes sense that ancient Africans would use, drawings, carvings or other objects to represent, for instance, a deadly snake to warn children against danger. It is also reasonable to assume that the objects of such symbols or the symbols themselves would over time become what we call idols or gods. The role of these objects and symbols is what has me perplexed. Today we still see symbolic objects that are given respect as we can imagine a carving of a snake as a symbol to warn of death might be given respect for their ability to teach children about danger. What about Judaica? Does Judaica fall into this category or can it be described as something else? 71.100.0.187 (talk) 07:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not really sure that I understand the nature of your question, 71.100. Symbolism exists in all cultures and in all religions. Why should Judaism be an exception? Clio the Muse (talk) 02:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not making it an exception, necessarily. I am not as familar with Judaism as I would like. When I stumble across such information (Judaica) it presents an opportunity to understand Judaism better from my own perspective, to think outside the box and hence to gain insight into my own beliefs and those of others which might be different. 71.100.0.187 (talk) 09:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that, 71.100. I'm still puzzled, though. I freely confess that I have no intimate knowledge of the inner workings of Judaism, but I do know that symbols and symbolism of the kind you have identified are universal to all human cultures: they cross history; they cross religion; they cross time; and they cross space. Let me put it this way: your inquiry would be no more meaningful to me if you substituted Shintoism or Tibetan Buddhism for Judaism. Is there something I am missing? Clio the Muse (talk) 23:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps. I am not aware of any restriction such as "...having no other gods before Me..." and the general condemnation of idolatry within both Judaism and Christianity in other religions, although it is logical to assume that Buddha would likewise be a jealous god and place restrictions on idolatry unless that idolatry uniquely represented Buddha and his teachings and could not symbolize anything else. What I am trying to learn is what rule separates acceptable material objects as symbols from unacceptable ones. For instance, I know the Golden Calf was an unacceptable object. Is it just a difference between worship and reverance or is there more to it than that? In other words by definition what is an idol and what is not? (...and no fair including my automobile for I love that thing dearly and we shall absolutely never part. ;D) 71.100.0.187 (talk) 01:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Just as symbols stand in to represent abstract thoughts, when it comes to religion I find it most helpful to go for the abstract rather than the concrete. An idol, in this sense, would stand for anything that becomes a focus of the attention in place of God. So a car could actually be an apt example, if the time a person might spend obsessing about it takes up time they might spend on their spiritual life. I do not belong to the Jewish religion, but I would guess the problem with the calf was not the object itself, but the distraction of focus from the Infinite God onto a limited object. However, that's a personal interpretation - as you say, different religions have different dogmas and definitions. BTW, Islam does not permit images of Muhammad. 64.231.10.94 (talk) 14:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, here is the problem. Your attention must be directed somewhere. Objects which enhance your attention to God are a good thing but objects which distract focus are bad. Objects which enhance focus on doing God's work (Judaica) are good. Objects which distract focus on doing God's work (Golden calf as object and symbol of money) are bad. These examples of course being subject to exception for instance if one were working hard to earn money that would fulfill a purpose of God versus one's own purposes with the compound exception that money might be necessary for sustenance in order to allow God's work to be done. Anyway the basic idea for a rule then is whether the object enhances or distracts focus on God and hence the restriction on presenting images of Muhammad.

I'm glad I asked this question I have a somewhat better understanding now. 71.100.0.187 (talk) 16:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Gayelle

Removed duplicate post, also on Language Desk. Malcolm XIV (talk) 17:34, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Holocost

How many people were murdered by the Nazi's in greece? was it either 663,000 or 66,300? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.150.102 (talk) 10:35, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

If we're just counting Jews killed in the Holocaust, our article says about sixty thousand (there weren't half a million Jews in Greece to begin with). According to World War II casualties, the total Greek war dead was still less than half a million. Algebraist 12:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Title and Artist?

Hi there. Does anyone know the name of this painting, and the artist? Thanks. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/bartleby232323/portrait.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheldon Bartleby (talk • contribs) 11:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Can't help you, but it's brilliant! Good luck in your search.--Artjo (talk) 19:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It's Portrait of the Philosopher and Poet Vladimir Solovyov by Ivan Kramskoi (1885). See the article on Vladimir Solovyov for more information on the model and another portrait. ---Sluzzelin talk 11:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

*retrieving lower jaw from floor* The Ivan Kramskoi article hasn't made it all the way to English from Russian. I hope a bilingual type can attend to it. (I love this painting.) --Milkbreath (talk) 12:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Pyramids, Ice Ages and The End of the World.

These are some things I was wondering about a little while ago, and I thought maybe you could help me. Firstly I've heard it mentionned that noone actually knows how old the Great Pyramid is, since there's nothing there that can be accurately dated, and that the official 4500 years is just a guess. Is it true, or is it just that we can't be 100% certain about it? And then how old is it? I've also heard that we wouldn't be able to make one now, even with all our technology, and that it would have taken far too many people far too long to make it the way history claims. So is it posible that it is left over from a lost civilization long before the Egyptian Old Kingdom? What will the Great Pyramid look like in thousands of years time? Would it have eroded down to a slight mound of rock, or will it be almost as it is now?

If there was an ice age, right now, and in a few years/decades time most of the world was covered in ice and snow, and then after thousands of years it all melted and probably flooded all the areas that hadn't been under ice, and everything we've made has been abandonned for all these millennia, what would be left? Would there be huge ruined cities all over the world, or would everything have been totally wiped out with only the tiniest scraps left. And how would the survivors be living? And as a link to the previous questions, what would have happened to the pyramids? They're far enough south that they wouldn't have been covered by the ice, but would the changes in climate and the thousands of years have affected them?

And I'm sure you can see where I'm going now. Is it at all possible thet the pyramids were build thousands of years before people believe they were, by a civilization that was wiped out during the last ice age? Are there any other traces of civilization that might be from that time? And I've also read in a few places that there were supposedly natural disasters all over the world around 5000 years ago. How likely is that to have happened? I'm sure I remember also reading about how technology at the time supposedly dropped backwards, and then it seems like everything started around the same time, the first countries all appeareing all over the world and developing governments and cities and writng all around the same time. Is any of this anything other than an odd coinidence?

One very last question, when did that happen. the only date I've ever read was 5121 years ago, based on some archaeological work, I think it was in South America. Is this an official, trusted date, or just the random guess of someone that wanted to become famous and sell lots of copies of his book?

Any references to sources where I can read more about these subjects would also be very much appreciated. Sorry for the insane length of my question. HS7 (talk) 13:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The Great Pyramid of Giza article talks about dating, and various "alternative theories". There are tons of "practise" pyramids that didn't quite work, then got progressively bigger and bigger until they figured out how to do it right (and we even know the name of one of the architects); there are ruins of little towns where the workers were housed and fed (and buried); there is nothing un-Egyptian about the Pyramids, everything inside and out shows that they were designed and used by them; for these and many more reasons the Great Pyramid and the others are obviously Egyptian. I'll leave the rest of your questions to others, but the truth about the Great Pyramid is so much more interesting than the speculation. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure that part of Geology and studying of rocks would be able to tell you when there was an ice age, what came after, what came before -- all based on the layers of rock and sediment and compression etc. In other words, I'm sure that whatever ice ages have come and gone, certain theories have been disputed or never even put forth by scientists based on a lack of certain evidence. Rfwoolf (talk) 15:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure I remember that there were very few pyramids before the great pyramd, and then the more recent one's were tiny copies of it, and I would have thought that if an ice age could do so much damage to mountains anything as insubstantial as the stuff people have made would leave almost no trace. but if you say there's no chance, I'll believe you.HS7 (talk) 15:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It was one of the later pyramids, I believe. · AndonicO ^Hail! 16:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The last bunch of ice ages did not come close to covering most of the Earth, nor flooding it. See Ice age -- specially the map under Ice age#Recent glacial and interglacial phases. Pfly (talk) 19:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

For an imaginative exploration of the theme of lost civilisations swallowed by an ice age, you might like the novel La nuit du temps by Rene Barjavel, translated as The Ice People. On a more factual note, marine archeology is widening our knowledge about sites on the coastal shelf, i.e. places now under water, that bear signs of human inhabitation and civilisation. These settlements were flooded when the seas last rose a few thousand years ago. BrainyBabe (talk) 20:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Cold War liability

After doing some research and looking over some of the opinions from the traditionalists, revisionists, and post-revisionists I still need some help on finding major events in which the United States either a) could share responsibility for "starting" the "war", b) acting as an aggressor in the "war" or c) both. I would greatly appreciate the feedback. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.64.133 (talk) 14:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, an easy one in the "starting" aspect could be the Baruch Plan, whereby the US set up a pretty much impossible proposal for postwar atomic cooperation that made it clear that the US intended to maintain a nuclear monopoly if possible and participate in an arms race if not. At least, that is how many have interpreted it, though viewed with a more favorable eye you can easily see that the US was prepared to go into quite problematic areas (handing over its nuclear weapons to an international body) and that the Soviet Union was either 1. lying when it pledged to not pursue weapons on its own or 2. was counting on its conventional advantages when doing so. But anyway, it's out there. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 14:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It is quite, quite wrong, I believe, to see the Cold War as a process entirely initiated by the Soviets. One might conceivably argue that it begins with debates over the future of Germany after 1945, when the United States and the other western powers refused to consider Soviet proposals for reunification based on neutrality, the Austrian solution of 1955. The formation of NATO in 1949 may have been a purely defensive measure, but it greatly increased Soviet fears for their own security. Looking at the war in the widest possible sense, including covert operations, then surely it would be meaningful to describe US actions in Guatemala in 1954, in Cuba in 1961 and in Chile in 1973 as calculated forms of aggression. Furthermore, Washington’s attempts to keep a hold of the Latin America ‘backyard’-perhaps in a perverse interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine-, by supporting a variety of right-wing dictators, is surely capable of being measured alongside Soviet attempts to retain their hold on Eastern Europe. Consider, also, Richard Nixon's decision to launch a major bombing offensive against Cambodia and all of the horror that action subsequently induced. I could go on like this, but I hope this has given you sufficient leads. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, how times change. As an American child growing up during the Reagan years, I find the first part of question surprising. For us, the War was about "the bomb" and, of course, we had invented the bomb. Why would we think the Soviets started the Cold War? (Well, it was about "godless Communists" too, I guess!) Rmhermen (talk) 16:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Neonazi ideology

What do neonazi adherents around the globe have in common? It there something more than Nazi symbols, recreational violence and a believe on a Jewish conspiracy (including Holocaust denial)? What is the difference between neonazi ideology and the historical nazis? Do these rowdies would have survived in Nazi Germany? Mr.K. (talk) 17:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• White supremacy, almost always in the socio-economic competition with "inferior races" is a universal characteristic. White in this context may refer to their own ethnic group within the wider fabric of society.
• To support the injustice (typically it is an economic one) perceived by these groups, various simplifications of history and theories of conspiracies are popular.

(For a recent example see: Holocaust denial above.) 71.100.0.140 (talk) 22:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Some follow a pagan / occultist crypto-religion and display an almost Chaplinesque cult with obscure symbolism.
• There is a widespread macho "blood and honour" chivalry of doubtful Arthurian / Norse / Viking origin manifest.

Our article on Neo-Nazism has useful details and many links to organisations in Europe, the Americas and Oceania. All groups that I am aware of are of Caucasian (lacking a better term) genealogy. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:13, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

There is a fringe Neonazi movement active in Japan. Ninebucks (talk) 10:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

What they share in common is a general adherence to the most irrational forms of thought. Contemporary Neo-Nazi ideology, unlike the classic variety, is rarely, if ever, anchored in any meaningful way to a normal political process, which tends to exacerbate still further its extremes and its eccentricities. Is it possible to believe that there are Neo-Nazis in Israel and Neo-Nazis in Russia, existing among people who suffered most from Hitlerism? Well, there are. By 'rowdies' I assume you mean Skinheads, Mr K. Well, the Nazis had their very own thuggish rowdies. Of course, thuggishness was acceptable when it was directed towards the right targets. When it was not, then there were ways of curtailing the threat. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Civilization and barbarism

Taking as my point of departure texts like Conrad's Heart of Darkness I was wondering if the thinking expressed here was something of a late imperial phenomenon? Are there no earlier examples of European awareness of what might be said to be the fragilty of civilization, an awareness that that even the most cultivated minds are able to entertain the most bartbarous notions; that the supposed savagery of the native 'outsiders' simply serves to mask an even deeper savagery in those who define what is savage? I hope this all makes sense. Topseyturvey (talk) 17:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

They were certainly aware of the savagery of their own lower classes!!!! AllenHansen (talk) 19:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Can't address your exact question, but expressions of admiration by Europeans for non-European civilizations certainly predate Conrad. Two examples off top of my head: Sir William Jones on Sanskrit and Marco Polo, I think, though the wikipedia article doesn't give the quote I think I remember. WikiJedits (talk) 01:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The notion of the 'savage in all of us' is an ancient one, Topseyturvey, finding a place in European thought all the way from Plato to Conrad and beyond. You might consider Montaigne's essay on cannibals, in which he says that the civilized Frenchmen of his generation during the Wars of Religion are more savage and more cannibal than all the warrior tribes of Brazil:

I think there is more barbarity in eating a man alive than in eating him dead; and in tearing by tortures and the rack a body still full of feeling, in roasting a man bit by bit, in having him bitten and mangled by dogs and swine...than in roasting and eating him after he is dead.

As for the dangers and paradoxes in the mission of imperial civilization you really could do no better than heed the words of the eponymous hero of Gulliver's Travels;

A crew of pirates are driven by a storm they know not wither; at length a boy discovers land from the top-mast; they go on shore to rob and plunder; they see a harmless people, they are entertained with kindness, they give the country a new name, they take formal possession of it for the king, they set up a rotten plank or a stone for a memorial, they murder two or three dozen of the natives, bring away a couple more by force for a sample, return home, and get their pardon. Here commences a new Dominion acquired with a title of Divine Right. Ships are sent out at the first opportunity; the natives driven out and destroyed, their princes tortured to discover their gold; a free licence given to all acts of inhumanity and lust; the Earth reeking with the blood of its inhabitants: And this execrable crew of butchers employed in so pious an expedition, is a modern colony sent to convert and civilize an idolatrous and barbarous people.

Who exactly, one has, are the Yahoos and who are the Houyhnhnms? And is the savage no more than a response to savagery? Yes, the Yahoos are Swift's satire on a depraved humanity. But what of the Houyhnhmns who, in the midst of their wisdom and cultivation, discuss the possibility that the Yahoos should 'be exterminated from the face of the Earth?

Lots of questions and no easy answers. I would suggest if you wish to pursue these difficult issues further then you should glance over Claude Rawson's excellent study, God, Gulliver and Genocide: Barbarism and the European Imagination, 1492-1945. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

See also Noble savage. Corvus cornix_talk 16:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

You might want to look at Bartolomé de las Casas and Valladolid debate for an earlier empire. E. D. Morel was the Las Casas of Conrad's epoch. Don't know who would be the Conrad of Las Casas' (Montaigne, as above?, but am trying to think of a Spaniard). Tacitus in the famous speech of Calgacus springs to mind for an even earlier time. It is nearly a logical truth that such awareness is a late (or middle) imperial phenomenon. If people were so self aware to begin with, their lust for dominion would be muted before it was exercised. The Owl of Minerva (the musing of Clio? :-) ) flies at dusk.John Z (talk) 23:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, John; always at dusk! Clio the Muse (talk) 00:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Largest light festival of Europe

Can somebody look at the talk page of West Country Carnival? The writer of this article claims that this festival is the largest light festival of Europe (the article comes up with 160,000 visitors), where Fête des lumières received 4 million visitors in 2006 and not even taken into consideration the yearly events with fireworks at sylvester. I'm not native English, so I'd hoped one of you could verify the facts. Other typical thing is the revert of two incorrect interwiki's to Bridgwater. Thank you for your help! Davin7 (talk) 17:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Anybody? Davin7 (talk) 08:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I've deleted the spurious claim. I'm not sure what you mean about the revert of two incorrect interwiki's to Bridgwater, but I'll go and have a look. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I see you have found the two misplaced interwiki's too. I hope you'll keep the article on your watchlist for a couple of weeks or so, because s/he has reverted all corrections so far. Davin7 (talk) 18:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Naturist children

How do children become naturists? I thought it was something people find out during their adult life and decide to give it a go. Is it because of naturist parents, or do children discover this by themselves? JIP | Talk 18:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

How young are you thinking when you use the term "children"? Any child on the net could potentially find out about it through Wikipedia or many other sources. Dismas|^(talk) 23:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I was meaning mainly kindergarten-age children. JIP | Talk 04:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

You seem to be under the impression that clothed is the "normal" state for toddlers. Preschool children run around naked not because they've made a deliberate decision to be a "naturist", but because they aren't aware that running around naked isn't socially acceptable. FiggyBee (talk) 04:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. I've heard a number of stories from parents about their children shedding their clothing as soon as the parents back is turned. The children aren't old enough to have had modesty, or a sense that the human body is dirty (whichever way you want to look at it), instilled in them yet. Dismas|^(talk) 10:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I know that small enough children will, in sufficient privacy, go around naked as if it was no big deal. But I was asking about children consciously being naturists, for example by attending naturist events. How does this happen? Do the parents announce "today we're going to a naturist event, do you want to come with us?" JIP | Talk 14:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

If the parents are naturists and the children are of an age where they are being cared for by the parents, then the parents will just bring their kids to the event and they will all go around naked. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 14:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Below a certain age, I suspect it's pretty meaningless to try to claim that the child is consciously a naturist.. That's like claiming the toddler is a Republican. Such abstractions are not meaningful to small children. Friday (talk) 14:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

In the same vein, I always laugh when I read that so-and-so was "born a Catholic/Methodist/whatever". It's not a genetic trait. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you know kindergarten-age children who consciously attend naturist events, and naturist parents who check if their toddler wants to attend such an event? I think their parents just take them along, as any parents would take their children along for a picnic or a day on the beach without checking whether the kids are conscious picnickists or beachists.  --Lambiam 08:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Republic of Korea's (South Korea) Stance on Disarmament Topics

I have searched all over, and have not been able to find a definitive stance regarding South Korea's positions on the following topics:

-Private Military Corporations
-Afghanistan
-Border Control

Would anyone happen to know the country's policy on these aforementioned topics? If not, is there common stance South Korea promotes regarding security issues? Besides the North Korea conflict, the Republic of Korea does not seem to be a huge player/influence in this field. Any help is greatly appreciated! Yellowhighlight (talk) 20:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

1937 Soviet Census

I've decided to repost this question, which has not been answered and is going to be archived soon.

What literacy rate did the 1937 Soviet census determine for the USSR? The education in the Soviet Union article gives the literacy rate in 1939, but the 1939 census was doctored by the government and is not reliable.

Happy Earth Week to all! --Bowlhover (talk) 21:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The adult literacy of the rural population also increased in the 1930s, although by no means as spectacularly as Soviet propagandists claimed. According to the census figures, the literacy of the rural population in the 9-49 age group increased from 51 percent in 1926 to 84 percent in 1939. For rural men in the age group, that meant a rise from 67 percent literacy in 1926 to 92 percent in 1939; for rural women, a rise from 35 percent to 77 percent. Now that the suppressed 1937 figures have emerged, the 1939 figures look a little high and should probably be adjusted downwards by 7-8 percent. Even so, the overall increase was impressive—or would have been, had the regime not been claiming 90 percent adult literacy for the Soviet population since 1932.⁷⁸

78. 1926 and 1939 figures Itogi Vsesoiuznoi perepisi naseleniia 1959 goda. SSSR (Svodnyi tom) (Moscow, 1962), 88; 1937 data from Poliakov (1990), 65-66; 1932 claim in Itogi vypoleniia piatiletnego plana razvitiia narodnogo khoziaistva SSSR (Moscow, 1933), 222. Unfortunately, the 1937 census literacy figures do not include urban-rural breakdown. For the total urban and rural population aged nine to forty-nine, the 1937 census found 75 percent literacy (86 percent of men, 65 percent of women).

Fitzpatrick, S. (1994). Stalin's peasants: resistance and survival in the Russian village after collectivization. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 225-6 & fn. 78 p. 363. OCLC 28293091. If you'd like the Russian language sources, Poliakov (1990) is: A. Poliakov, V. B. Zhiromskaia, 1. N. Kiselev, "Polveka molchaniia (Vsesoiuznaia perepis' naseleniia 1937 g.)," Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, 1990 nos. 6 and 7. The 1937 census data are available in Vsesoiuznaia perepis' naseleniia 1937g. Kratkie itogi (Moscow, 1991).—eric 22:22, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Eric, has stolen my thunder, Bowlhover! Anyway, in addition to the sources he has mentioned I would also suggest that you might care to have a look at Shiela Fitzpatrick's Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times, published by Oxford University Press in 1999, which gives some figures for the 1926 census. According to this only 57% of the total Soviet population aged 9 to 49 was literate, although the pattern was uneven, with illiteracy most concentrated in the rural regions of Russia itself and in the Central Asian republics. The urban literacy rate at this time was calculated at 81% According to the 1939 census 81% of the whole Soviet population was literate, which seems to be the statistical equivalent of the rates of production given under the Five Year Plans! Clio the Muse (talk) 00:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I've added the 1937 literacy rate to the article. --Bowlhover (talk) 00:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Cottage names in 19C England

I have seen evidence that the practice of giving cottages names did not become usual in England until the late nineteenth century. Is this true, and were they named by the occupants or the owner/landlord? --Milkbreath (talk) 21:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Milkbreath, might I ask what the evidence is that this practice was uncommon before the end of the nineteenth century? Clio the Muse (talk) 02:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Not that I'm suggesting that the practice was uncommon, just that the tiny bit of evidence I have suggests at least an upsurge in the practice in rural Devonshire. The censuses from the middle of the century list people by hamlet or village and no more, but later they are shown living in named cottages. My theory is that the cottages had no names and then they did, but I don't know; I don't even know that the cottages were there before. I am thinking that manors often had names, as some estates do today, such as "The Coffee Grounds", and that folks started naming their cottages in emulation of that practice, but, again, I don't know, so I'm asking. A better question might be how did the practice arise and who did the naming. --Milkbreath (talk) 11:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

This book might help?: Owl's Hoot: How People Name Their Houses. WikiJedits (talk) 15:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Milkbreath. There were certainly named cottages at the beginning of the nineteenth century, and even earlier; Wordsworth's Dove Cottage in the Lake District comes to mind here. I am reluctant to go any further with this, for the simple reason that I can offer only speculation, rather than illumination. However, if you forgive the indulgence, I will suggest a possible explanation for the upsurge.

Your evidence might indicate a combination of two things: a growth in population and the need to differentiate dwellings for postal purposes. The Penny Black, the world's first adhesive stamp, was introduced in 1840, making possible a universal postal service, available at a flat rate. Prior to this people were charged in accordance with the distance mail was carried, making the cost prohibitive for most. More post as the century progressed would obvious require a more precise addressing system; more precise than, say, Jane Hardy who lives in Abbotsham, Devonshire.

But, alas, this is pure speculation on my part. However, on the question of precise addressing, it might interest you to know that a read not so long ago a manuscript account of a journey made by a man from Haddington in Scotland to Munich in Bavaria, in the period just after the abdication of Napoleon in 1814. At one point in his trip through the Rhineland he starts to describe the numbered 'markings' on houses and cottages used for purposes of military call up, seeing this practice as evidence of Continental absolutism, entirely alien to a British tradition. At first I failed to understand his exact meaning, when it occurred to me that he was simply talking about numbering dwellings as a way of identifying and locating their inhabitants, for postal purposes, amongst other things! This was clearly not the practice in Britain at the time. Clio the Muse (talk) 23:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. The postal angle is worth looking into. No numbers, so maybe names? I like it. By the way, how does it feel to have a mind as orderly as a card catalogue? Mine's like a lumberyard. --Milkbreath (talk) 00:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you also. I suppose mine must be ordered,then, in the same precise fashion as the Little Corporal's! Clio the Muse (talk) 00:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Some sources which help to answer this question are pre-twentieth century conveyances, wills, manorial records, etc. Big and important houses are named. Middling houses are called 'the Parsonage', 'the Mill', 'the Ironmaster's house', etc. For a cottage, where it needs to be identified, you will usually find a description of the land it stands on, then "and dwellinghouse". If a lesser house is named, it is usually done with the family name of the owner and/or previous owner: 'Parrott's, late Wickman's', etc. Xn4 07:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Christian selling to Muslims

Would it be considered a sin if a Christian sells things to Muslims? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.119.61.7 (talk) 22:22, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly by some of the more insane Christian denomiations, but I very much doubt any mainstream branch of Christianity would think any such thing. Algebraist 22:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

There were some occasions in the Middle Ages when it was, you could be excommunicated for selling things to them (or, specific things like wood or weapons). But that was only because the Pope didn't want, say, the Egyptians to have an advantage during a crusade against them. Otherwise selling and trading with the Muslims carried on as usual, and even excommunication couldn't always get in the way of a good profit! Adam Bishop (talk) 00:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I personally wouldn't mind, and I don't know of anyone who would; and more directly, no it isn't a sin. · AndonicO ^Hail! 23:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Neo-Nazi, Aryan Brotherhood and Islam

What gangs or organizations include these and other anti-semitic groups in their ranks and/or otherwise bring them together? 71.100.15.211 (talk) 23:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe the first two get together sometimes, but not with the Muslims! In fact, Muslims are often their targets. AllenHansen (talk) 12:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Can't say anything about those specific groups, but in fact Tom Metzger and Louis Farrakhan met with each other amicably in 1985 to explore areas of common ground, and part of the allegation of New anti-semitism is that at times Islamists and far-rightists find a certain pragrmatic common interest in a shared hatred Jews and opposition to the existence of Israel (the most notorious representative of this trend being Ahmed Huber whose Wikipedia article apparently just got deleted, but who was prominently mentioned in the Washington Post on April 28th, 2002). AnonMoos (talk) 15:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I suspect you'd find it a lot less common nowadays since many of these groups like to use terrorism to prove their claim of the evils of all non-white people so Arabs and Muslims are a convinient target. Not saying it doesn't happen of course (after all we have Jewish anti-semites) but it's probably relatively rare despite their shared interest in some areas Nil Einne (talk) 18:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure about neo-Nazis, but the paleo kind and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem famously worked together. --D. Monack | talk 20:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

March 31

gayelle

is there any college related research in the interdisciplinary studies regarding the term gayelle?NewAtThis (talk) 00:31, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Considering it's a newly made up (and trademarked) term, it's doubtful. Corvus cornix_talk 16:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

My goodness, NewAtThis, I certainly hope not: it's an infelicitous and ugly neologism. Besides, it looks to me like a demeaning diminishing diminutive (ha!). One might as well offer the substitution of 'gayatess' or 'gayatette'. I mentioned this to some of my lesbian friends today and they fell into gales (gayelles?) of laughter! Clio the Muse (talk) 23:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

What strikes me is that it's only one letter out from gazelle... FiggyBee (talk) 03:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Penelope's suitors

How many were there?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 00:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

136 according to Apollodorus, 108 according to Homer. Our article on Penelope says 108, but for some reason the 20 from Zakynthos got lost along the way, I'll put them in. FiggyBee (talk) 00:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I've been helping on a featured article about the great Texan Ima Hogg--who turned down 30 marriage proposals--but I guess she still doesn't compare to Penny.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 00:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Not by a few, no. Good work with the article, by the way. :) · AndonicO ^Hail! 23:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

racist

What you do you call a person who is racist to his own race like a white guy hates his white people? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Mustafa (talk • contribs) 01:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

That's actually a rally good question. Given the richness of the English language, there has to be a word to describe such a person--what, for instance, is the opposite of a xenophobe?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 02:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The opposite of Xenophobe is Xenophile...it follows the greek structure. Xenos = stranger/foreigner, phobos = fear and philos = attraction. --Cameron (t/c) 18:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

intraphobe or racial self-loathing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.1.209.112 (talk) 02:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

See also Self-hatred-Lenticel ^(talk) 06:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thinking outside the box.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  08:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Leukophobe? Julia Rossi (talk) 09:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Bigot? AllenHansen (talk) 12:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

dunno about black and white but in the case of asian and white there are two words 1) for someone who is white on the outside, but yellow on the inside (an "egg"), and 2) for someone who is yellow on the outside but white on the insight (a "twinkie").

So, these two words, egg, and twinkie, might, in this narrow, comma, comma, comma, special usage refer to racial self-hatred. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.122.53.248 (talk) 14:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

They're usually used by others who are contemptuous of such people. (And I've heard the second type called a "banana".) Clarityfiend (talk) 19:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Whigger? Corvus cornix_talk 17:04, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Counter-xenophobe? -- JackofOz (talk) 22:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

You know, I was at a college party (how rare is that) some weeks ago, and someone asked that question. Someone answered. It was a term for Black people that was against Black people. Black cops. ;/ Neal (talk) 02:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC).

Contra White or contra Black or contra culture (culture used here in the sense of subscription to the same rules of conduct). I know several Blacks who were educated as and who think like Whites, even against there own race. When Blacks moved into their neighborhood they said they had decided to move to a different (predominantly white) neighborhood because the reason they moved to the neighborhood they were living in, in the first place, was to get away from "those people." Certain Whites (normally only women) can converse perfectly with Blacks in their own dialect, especially those who attend the same schools as Blacks and become half of an interracial marriage. -- 71.100.11.124 (talk) 04:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Stub Articles

As a college history project, a classmate and I wrote an article expanding on a previously existing stub article on Abd al-Aziz ibn Musa. We wrote out a 5 page paper, complete with an extensive bibliography, and submitted it as a Wikipedia page. It was recently classified as a stub, and we were wondering why this happened. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Screaminghistoriansofdoom (talk • contribs) 02:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

User John Z (Talk | contribs) has removed the stub tags on the article itself, but in the talk page ratings, it hasn't been rated again since (April 2007/Sept 2006). Afaik, you can go into edit the talk page and upgrade it to a start class article since it's been expanded with lots of references. Don't know, but it's not likely a bot will do that for you, so, be bold, and put your brief reasons on the talk page to cover it (such as, expanded with ref list) and sign it with four ~ to give the date and your signature for the record. : ) Julia Rossi (talk) 03:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the article before you added stuff and since, was there any reason why you simply removed mostly what was there already? Maybe I've got it wrong here, but I guess I prefer for newer material to be woven into existing material as a matter of personal choice, rather than simply blanking old stuff (unless it's completely off topic). I've got nothing against changing through editing but usually people before you also go to trouble in the first place. Have I misread the comparisons? Julia Rossi (talk) 03:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Considering the old version was unsourced, it isn't a great loss... it wasn't as well written either. · AndonicO ^Hail! 23:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

diplomatic missions and foreign policiy

'diplomatic missions are the overseas arms of the state through which the foreign policy is executed'. explain this statement indicating the different kinds of missions.

thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.43.175.151 (talk) 03:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Are the articles diplomatic mission and foreign policy any help? both have interesting links to other articles. Get back to us if you get stuck on something specific. Cheers, Julia Rossi (talk) 03:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps the use of the word mission is confusing? I know I used to find it confusing. The word 'mission' today is often interpreted through its military usage, as a generally short-term, immediate job - diplomatic missions on the other hand, are indefinate, and wide-ranging. Ninebucks (talk) 11:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

International Business

What is Export Orientation & trade dependency? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.43.62.250 (talk) 05:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Wilde and Salome

Oscar Wilde's Salome is so out of keeping with his other well-known plays that it clearer has an entirely different source of inspiration. Is anything known of the background to his tragedy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.104.181 (talk) 08:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Wilde's play is based loosely on the biblical story of the woman who danced for Herod, described as a daughter of Herodias - see St Matthew 14, 6-11. The only Salome named in the Bible is a follower of Jesus, but Josephus gives the dancer's name as Salome. Xn4 08:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

P. S. - For a much fuller answer to this question, see Salome. Xn4 11:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

As to Wilde's interest in the story, Neil McKenna's The Secret Life of Oscar Wilde tells us that, on his honeymoon, Wilde read Joris-Karl Huysmans' novel À Rebours, in which the hero Des Esseintes obsessed over 2 paintings of Salome by Gustave Moreau. Wilde was fascinated by this novel, and became obsessed with Des Esseintes's obsession, making it his own, and he spoke of the story often to his friends. Richard Ellmann's biography of Wilde tells us that he told his Guatemalan poet friend Enrique Gomez Carrillo that he "had the same sickness as Des Esseintes". It took him 7 years after reading Huysmans' novel to write his own play, although he had had had it in mind for a considerable time before he put pen to paper. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

It might also be of interest to you, 217.42, that Salome was fully consistent in its presentation with Wilde's theory of drama. In one of his letters he says that "...I like comedy to be intensely modern, and tragedy to walk in purple and be remote." And I don't suppose it is possible to get more purple and remote than Salome!

Incidentally, there is a third source of inspiration for the play, beyond Huysmans' novel and Moreau's paintings. In 1888 the Pall Mall Gazette published Salome, a dramatic poem by an American named J. C Heywood. This in turn draws on Heinrich Heine's Atta Troll, in which the ghost of Herodias kisses the head of John the Baptist. Heywood's innovation was to make her do this while still alive. It was Wilde who took this one step further, to make Salome kiss the lips of the Baptist in the great dramatic climax of his play. Ah! I have kissed thy mouth, Iokanaan, I have kissed thy mouth. There was a bitter taste on thy lips. Was it the taste of blood? . . . Nay; but perchance it was the taste of love. Purple and decadent; who else but Wilde could have achieved that?! Clio the Muse (talk) 00:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Purple and decadent; who else but Wilde could have achieved that? Various popes of the Medici family; and Jenny Joseph . Possibly. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

removing money in circulation

How much physical money would you have to remove from circulation in Australia, to cause problems, and what effects would it have? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.100.231.216 (talk) 08:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Christopher Skase. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The money supply of Australia 1984-2007

Like all developed economies, only a small fraction of Australia's money supply is in the form of physical notes and coins. From the graph on the right, I estimate physical current to be less than 5% of the money supply. Even if it was feasible to somehow remove a large proportion of the physical currency from circulation, it would have very little effect on the economy, and would be only a minor inconvenience to individual citizens, most of whom can probably use some form of electronic money for all but the smallest transactions. And the Australian government could easily solve the problem by minting more coins and printing more banknotes - the Royal Australian Mint has the capacity to produce over 2 million new coins per day. Gandalf61 (talk) 10:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Didn't sometrhing like that happen in England during the war with Napoleon, with no disasterous consequences? HS7 (talk) 19:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Indeed I'm pretty sure that in Australia, as in New Zealand, the use of EFTPOS and credit cards is widespread and common even for relatively small transactions like $5 at the supermarket or even for a trip to the local dairy or bakery. Nil Einne (talk) 18:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

BTW "dairy" in New Zealand English refers not to the place where cows are milked but to a convenience store. BrainyBabe (talk) 02:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

April Fool

Since tommorrow is April Fool's Day I would be interested to know of some of more noteable pranks, practical jokes, hoxes and deceptions recorded over time, not necessarily perpetrated on 1 April! ZZT9 (talk) 12:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but the Ref Desk committee has banned all April Fool-related questions. There might be a useful article here, but you didn't hear it from me. Gandalf61 (talk) 13:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

If you wait a day, lots of newspapers, TV stations and website run stories about good jokes from previous years. Although sometimes they like to make up good previous jokes... DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

"On 1 April 1925," six-year-old Raymond Smullyan was lying sick in bed ... "In the morning my brother Emile (ten years my senior) came into my bedroom and said: "Well, Raymond, today is April Fool's Day, and I will fool you as you have never been fooled before!" I waited all day for him to fool me, but he didn't." He couldn't sleep and complained to his mother who commanded the older brother to resolve the issue immediately. Emile explained to Raymond that he had fooled him by not fooling him after making him expect being fooled. ... "I recall lying in bed long after the lights were turned out wondering whether or not I had really been fooled." Raymond Smullyan, What is the name of this book?, Prentice-Hall (1978) 83.78.176.92 (talk) 14:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Jovian-Plutonian gravitational effect was pretty awesome. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, here is a real beauty for you, ZZT9. The great Jonathan Swift hated all forms of superstition, especially when it took the form of astrology. He had a particular loathing of one almanac-writer and astrologer by the name of John Partridge. Partridge compounded his offence in Swift's eyes by being a Whig, who attacked the Tory Anglican establishment. He was also in the habit of using his almanacs to predict the deaths of notable figures, achieving a few hits and far more misses. Swift took revenge in January 1708 by publishing a letter, under the pseudonym of Isaac Bickerstaff, entitled Predictions for the Year, in which he forecast Partridge's death of a 'raging fever.'

On April Fool's Day itself, another letter was published, purporting to have been written by 'man employed by the Revenue', in which it was announced that Partridge had indeed died. Swift went on to compose a 'eulogy', damming both Partridge and, more particularly, damming those who took his nonsense seriously. Before long Partridge, who was very much alive, had regular crowds of mourners calling at his house, so dense that the trades people could get nowhere near the front door to make deliveries. He published a letter, saying he was still alive, to which Bickerstaff responded that nobody who was alive could possibly have written "such damned stuff as this." Partridge's reputation is said never to have recovered. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

There is the old BBC Spaghetti harvesting hoax. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 00:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

If 1 April isn't a requirement, then it's worth considering Forgotten Silver: a fake documentary made by Peter Jackson. NZ's Country Calendar also regularly announces fake agricultural developments (you can watch highlights here and discussion of both of these examples can be found in this book)

The spaghetti hoax mentioned by Bibliomaniac15 was in 1957: more here if interested. That link will also lead you to other well-known hoaxes. Gwinva (talk) 01:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I enjoyed reading the Top 100 April Fool's Day Hoaxes of All Times. This is on the same website that Gwinva pointed out as a source for the spaghetti hoax, but Gwinva's link is now broken. --Bowlhover (talk) 05:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Fixed: a keying-in error, sorry. Gwinva (talk) 07:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Have a read of the "did you know..." on the front page today. . .or is that a double bluff April Fool. In today's Guardian there is an advert by BMW purporting to have developed a system to dissuade dogs from peeing on car wheels, its called the Canine Repellent Alloy Protection (System)Richard Avery (talk) 15:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well if 1 April isn't a requirement, I really think it's difficult to beat The War of the Worlds (radio) Nil Einne (talk) 18:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The Dictionary of National Biography has posted links to some hoaxers and jokers that makes entertaining reading.

references (insecure life in pakistan)

i want a help with an assignment i have to write on

'causes of insecure life in pakistan'

can anyone tell me any good sources for citing n quoting (e.g any essay related to it or factual or statistical data) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.128.4.231 (talk) 12:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

That sounds like too big a topic. What kind of insecurity? Food? Political? Health? Hope one of these links can get you started, and best with your assignment. WikiJedits (talk) 16:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Some would say that one very important (though seldom publicly-acknowledged) cause of many of Pakistan's woes has been "feudalism", or extreme oligarchy. None of the governments of Pakistan have really directly confronted this issue, and many of Pakistan's rulers have been substantial "feudal" oligarchs themselves. There have been claims that some Pakistani governments have found it convenient to keep the Islamist agitation pot boiling partially in order to distract attention from economic and political inequalities, and one of the reasons why Bangladesh ultimately seceded from Pakistan is that Bengalis came to feel that a narrow Urdu-Punjabi elite was not willing to share significant power no matter how many votes the Bengali parties accumulated... AnonMoos (talk) 20:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The English Gentleman

I've been reading your article on the Gentleman and it is clear that a major change over how this notion was perceived in England came in the middle of the nineteenth century with the rise of the new middle classes. So, what were the main differences in the qualities that made up an English gentleman from, say, the end of the eighteenth century to the end of the nineteenth century? What, in other words, was the 'superior standard of conduct', other the courtesy towards women and general good manners?Balzac's Ghost (talk) 13:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's a 1746 point of view on the subject, and an 1852 take (or, in more detail, this from 1843 (American), although I am not sure if it was not written years before publication). WikiJedits (talk) 16:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I think, Balzac's Ghost, you might very well find what you are looking for in Mark Girouard's The Return of Camelot: Chivalry and the English Gentleman. The author describes the nineteenth century rise of what he calls 'the chivalrous gentleman', possessing specific codes of honour-focusing on notions of duty-that would simply have been unintelligible to his eighteenth century counterpart, who respected themselves for their property, not their virtues. In the high-noon of Victorian England the gentleman is reshaped in the light of contemporary domestic virtues, and by a new emphasis on the importance of duty, self-sacrifice and heroism. The English public schools themselves-the nursery of the gentleman-glamorised these new virtues, thrusting aside the self-interested Flashman and his kind in favour of the altogether more morally appealing Tom Brown. Old notions of chivalry were reinterpreted to suit the modern mood, a revived Malory tailored to the hour.

For an emergent middle-class audience Charles Dickens parodied the older type of gentleman, more devoted to his own interests than to the community at large, in characters like Jem Harthouse, James Steerforth and Eugene Wrayburn, all very much on the model, it might be said, of a mature Flashman, attentive, primarily, to their own selfish desires, with a code of personal ethics that neither sought nor required any greater sanction. Now, the greatest fear was for a gentleman to show any form of cowardice, moral or physical. There is perhaps no better example of the 'new model' gentleman than Oscar Wilde, who, faced with disgrace, refused to leave England because, as he later confessed, he did not want to be 'thought of as a coward and a deserter.' An eighteenth-century Oscar would almost certainly have headed straight for Dover, caring nothing for the opinion of others, good or bad! Clio the Muse (talk) 01:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I recommend Bryant's Age of Elegance and White's Age of Scandal. AllenHansen (talk) 08:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Carbon emissions and locally produced food

I remember reading an article in the Economist a few months ago which cleverly debunked various environmental shibboleths. It argued, for example, that food produced locally to the consumer was actually worse for the planet in terms of carbon emissions than food flown/shipped in from far away. If anyone could provide me with a link to that article (I've searched the Economist website without success), I'd be very grateful. Failing that, does anyone know how the argument outlined above would be made? --Richardrj ^{talk email} 13:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

This is a bit more than a few months ago, but the December 7 2006 issue has an article entitled "Ethical food" which goes into the argument. It's not included free on the Economist website, but I'd be happy to email it to you if you're unable to access it otherwise. Just post a message on my talk page if you're interested. GreatManTheory (talk) 14:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

That's the one; thanks very much. Apologies for getting the time period wrong. Thanks for the offer, but I found the article on Usenet. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 14:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

microeconomic development

.A chemical manufacturer processes two chemicals C1 and C2 in varying propositions to produce three products A,B and C.He wishes to produce at least 150 units of A,200 units of B and 60 units of C.Each tonne of C1 yields 3 of A,5 of B and 3 of C.If C1 costs $40 per tonne and C2 costs $50 per tonne

(a)Formulate the problem as a minimisation LP model

(b)Formulate the inverse or dual of the primal formulation in (a)above

(c)Express the dual in (b)above as standard LP model

(d)set up the initial simplex tableau for the solution to this problem(do not solve)

(e)using the graphical method,identify the feasibility region for the solution in the LP model. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.220.120.202 (talk) 09:01, 31 March 2008 (UTm

The reference desk doesn't do your homework for you. If there is a concept you don't understand then feel free to ask about that. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

wrong, I'm pretty sure the reference desk DOES do people's homework for them, they just have to disguise it first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.122.53.248 (talk) 14:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

by not assisting in the concepts you prove quite unworthy to turn to for help,this poor guy is posting his question for help and not to be let down like you are doing

This is a cut-and-paste copy of a question on the Mathematics RD here. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

To the OP: FYI, the page history records the author of every revision. This means when you come to your own defence while purporting to be a third party, we know about it. Algebraist 15:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

wife's college

is your wife's college your alma mater-in-law? What would that be in Latin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.122.53.248 (talk) 14:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

That would be your alma socrus. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think a socrus provides much alimentum, though. Deor (talk) 16:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

that would be the highest building in united states of africa —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.220.120.202 (talk) 14:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

CHRONOLOGICAL AGE

How is it possible to go through time, as in living life through the years,but not age in appearance physically or mentally having none of the usual signs of the age process?? Fluter —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.86.15.15 (talk) 14:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Um, it's not possible. Unless you're frozen in stasis or something. Otherwise your cells will, inevitably, age. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 14:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

It is possible if you are Dorian Grey, but you pay a terrible price. BrainyBabe (talk) 15:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

But cells are replaced all the time, they can't age much. People can look younger than they really are, I suppose. Especially if they have anti-aging surgery and stuff like that.HS7 (talk) 19:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Cells have a limited number of division before they become inactive and die. So no, cells aren't infinitely replaceable.--Lenticel ^(talk) 07:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The Baby Boomers have been looking for such an ability ever since the oldest one found his first grey hair. No luck so far! Perhaps the troubles in Tibet are to cover-up the discovery of the lamasery run by Hugh Conway. ៛ Bielle (talk) 21:31, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for all your comments,but this still doesn"t explain to me why at the age of 51 I have no grey hairs on a full head of dark hair,have youthful skin,a quick and sharp mental attitude,and many people say that I look 32? Maybe it was the water that I drank from the stream in Wales as a young boy that has kept me young all these years! Fluter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.86.15.15 (talk) 14:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The Mayo Clinic would like to hear from you! Julia Rossi (talk) 22:07, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It would have been wonderful if The Mayo Clinic could have contacted me when I was living in California for 19 years,unfortunately I now have a ban not to enter the U.S. until 2011(overstayed my visa by 19 years) so I will have to wait until then,maybe at that time I will look 28 years of age at 54! Fluter.

Minimum wage and working on comission in Saskatchewan

Does an employee have to be paid at least minimum wage, even if they work on comission. 207.195.109.67 (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Kara

Commission isn't mentioned in Saskatchewan's Minimum Wage Regulations. But The Labour Standards Regulations Act says (under "hourly wage") that "The hourly wage for employees who are employed as salespersons and who receive all of their remuneration as commissions is the minimum wage." I'm no good at interpreting legalese, so not sure if this answers your question – but if this doesn't, note that the first link contains a phone number to call for more information. WikiJedits (talk) 16:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Eupean Slavery Between the 1500-1800

I am doing a research paper for college on the world history of slavery and I was searching for information connected to slavery in the 1500-1800 with the european slaves. I cant find anything on Wiki that talks about this subject. Just a short explanation of the reseach thats needed;

This is a study that digs deeply into this slavery, the bondage of Europeans by north-African Muslims that flourished during the same centuries as the heyday of the trans-Atlantic trade from sub-Saharan Africa to the Americas. Here are explored--perhaps for the first time--the actual extent of Barbary Coast slavery, the dynamic relationship between master and slave, and the effects of this slaving on Italy, one of the slave takers' primary targets and victims.

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.134.46.221 (talk) 18:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you read our article at Barbary pirate? One book to start with is CHRISTIAN SLAVES, MUSLIM MASTERS:White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast and Italy, 1500-1800by Robert C. Davis. BrainyBabe (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's a Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/mar/11/highereducation.books

See also Sack_of_Baltimore... AnonMoos (talk) 20:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

72.134, I would refer you also to White Gold: The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and North Africa's One Million European Slaves by Giles Milton (Sceptre, 2005) and Piracy, Slavery and Redemption: Barbary Captivity Narratives from Early Modern England by D. J. Vikus (Columbia University Press, 2001). The problem was not just confined to the Mediterranean basin. Barbary corsairs were making regular raids on the south coast of England in the reign of Charles I. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:00, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

White Gold is the one I was trying to remember, so thanks, Clio. To add some historical perspective to the OP, there is the famous line about proto-English slaves, "not Angles but angels". BrainyBabe (talk) 09:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, there was some blurring of the categories of prisoners of war and slaves: many Europeans taken captive in wars or skirmishes were required to work. See for example John R. Jewitt, who was taken off Vancouver Island and later wrote Narrative of the Adventures and Sufferings of John R. Jewitt, only survivor of the crew of the ship Boston, during a captivity of nearly three years among the savages of Nootka Sound: with an account of the manners, mode of living, and religious opinions of the natives. I don't know if any modern historian has brought disparate accounts like this together. BrainyBabe (talk) 14:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Wavell the viceroy

I have read that if Archibald Wavell had remained as viceroy things might not have turned out as disastrously in India as they did under Mountbatten. Is there any merit in this view? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.194.213 (talk) 19:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest with you, 86.157, I'm not sure that it would have made all that much difference at that particular stage in history. In other words, the situation was slipping beyond the point where any single individual, even one as formidable and as sympathetic to India as Archibald Wavell, could have made that much difference. He was certainly in favour of a phased withdrawal, but one also has to consider the capacity of Britain itself-a country verging on bankruptcy-to manage such a potentially lengthy and expensive process. Wavell did his best, from the Simla conference until his dismissal as Viceroy in 1947, to bring Congress and the Muslim League together; but it was by this stage an altogether hopeless task. No Hercules could have managed things better; no Hercules could have prevented what was to come. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Origin of the South Atlantic Medal

Good morning/afternoon/evening my friends, wherever you may be!!! Just a quick question, I plan to expand an "Origin" section here.

On forums I've heard; The design of the ribbon is attributed to HM The Queen. This precedent was set by her father who designed the WW2 ribbons for the stars. She prepared a pastel sketch and it was sent to Toye, Kenning and Spencer Ltd who produced 14,000 mtrs of ribbon. The medal was authorised under the terms of Command Paper 8601. Perhaps you could mention this no when contacting the Medal Office. Alas I have no information as to who designed the medal but im sure this will be included in the Command Paper.

So I plan to write a letter to the "Ministry of Defence Medal Office". Now assuming they write back and confirm this (or give me another story), How do I convert make that physical letter into a reference for Wikipedia?

P.S. Sorry if this is the wrong place for this question, but if it is, there's nothing to stop you lot researching it online ha ha! (Good luck though, I spent ages trying a while ago)

Cheers, you lovely, lovely people! :D Ryan4314 (talk) 20:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Presumably you would have to have it published in some form, Ryan, perhaps in a national newspaper. I'm sorry; this sounds so trite and obvious, but I can think of no other acceptable method of authentication. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

A fall-back might be to scan and upload the letter to a suitable web site - that is, to publish it on the web. With a hyperlink, the letter itself could then be used as a reference, although it would not be such a reliable source as it would be if it were published more conventionally: the problem being that the web is full of things which aren't what they appear to be... so the more respectable the web site, the better. Xn4 07:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

There's an interesting idea on the duplicate of this question Wikipedia:Help desk#Origin of the South Atlantic Medal I posted on the "Help page", see what you guys think? Ryan4314 (talk) 11:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Non-Formal Education

Where can I find a list of famous people that did not have much formal schooling? (such as Thomas Edison) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.119.61.7 (talk) 20:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

See autodidacticism.--Pharos (talk) 00:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

(ec)There are doubtless many famous people who never had any trace of book learning, such as Adam, Eve, and perhaps Attila the Hun. For some who were mostly SELF-educated, see Autodidacticism, where famous persons such as Socrates, Avicenna, Benjamin Franklin, George Bernard Shaw, Feodor Chaliapin, Srinivasa Ramanujan, Michael Faraday, Alfred Russel Wallace , and Penn Jillette are listed, among others. Consider also Abraham Lincoln, who had no more that 18 months of classroom education. Edison (talk) 00:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

April 1

analogue for folk etymology?

What is it called when people make up false origins for obscure customs and traditions, in a manner analogous to a folk etymology? Thanks. --Allen (talk) 02:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

In a slightly more organised form it might be called pseudohistory... FiggyBee (talk) 03:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

...or it could be called, April Fool -- 71.100.11.124 (talk) 03:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

All customs and traditions are contrived and modern, so I guess it would be called folk etymology. Ninebucks (talk) 11:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

You might be interested in cargo cultism. --Sean 16:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses! It sounds like there's just no such word. Someone should make one up. Ninebucks, what do you mean when you say all customs and traditions are contrived and modern? --Allen (talk) 18:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

What firearms were used in the American Civil War?

I can't seem to find an article discussing the various types of muskets and rifles used in the American Civil War, if such an article exists. I know that the Minie rifle was the predominant weapon for both sides (although the CSA more of a mix, right?) -- but I seem to recall reading somewhere that by the end of the war, the Union had started using some kind of semi-automatic rifle, which gave them a considerable advantage. Is this the case? What kind of evolution of the standard infantry firearm was there over the course of the war? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.239.209.220 (talk) 05:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe these links will be helpful: Category:American Civil War rifles linking to sixteen models. Category:American Civil War weapons lists revolvers, pistols and guns as well. And there's a list of weapons in the American Civil War ---Sluzzelin talk 06:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Shan Yu

I was just wondering if anybody knew what the villain in Mulan, his sword, is? what kind is it? I think its cool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwking (talk • contribs) 05:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It looks like a type of flame-bladed sword and it's even mentioned in that article. I don't know whether it is based on a real sword wielded by the Huns or whether it's a Disney fantasy all the way. ---Sluzzelin talk 06:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

How to word a disability examination of a knee?

I am a healthcare professional and was asked by one of my patients to examine his knee which had been damaged while in the service and he had been awarded a 10% disability in 1990. However as he has gotten older, the knee is giving him more and more trouble and range of motion is limited much more than in 1990 and he wants to get another ruling on his disability to encompass the increasing disability. I am not quite sure how to word the exam to show the disability board that his knee is indeed limited in motion and contractured severely. Please help me find the correct terminology in describing the limited motion of this man's knee so that he will get a fair review of his disability.

Thanks for your help in advance,

Sincerely,

Nina Ravey (email address redacted to prevent spam)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Nravey (talk • contribs) 06:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm a little surprised that if you are a healthcare professional you are unable to describe a disability but maybe it's outside your usual area. The knee functions in two directions, so it may have limited flexion or limited extension. This is usually referred to in degrees, so a knee with only 130 degrees of extension will remain pretty bent, it should open out to about 180 degrees. The other aspects of the knee to be considered is lateral stability, it should not have any significant sideways movement. As well, the knee should be checked for forward/backward stability. The head of the tibia when pulled forward or pushed back should not move relative to the lower femoral extremity with the patient sitting and knee half bent. The physical appearance of the knee may be useful to describe if it is swollen or deformed in some way and finally you should record any pain the person feels either when subjected to reasonable examination pressure or when standing and using the joint. Richard Avery (talk) 10:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

You might find this link helpful. [11] Richard Avery (talk) 15:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Surely, this would be the field of some branch of orthopedics? Richard's answers look as if they should give the pointers you need. I would make the uneducated suggestion that, should this fall outside the scope of your education, someone else ought to study the patient and word their review. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 20:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Changing concept of the child

I am trying to draw up a time line of how our ideas and how we think about children children has changed over time from the middle ages/medieval times and I need some help! All i know is the generalised perception which has changed from children being objects to now beig the subject of our attention.

If you could help me out that will be great thank you xx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.18.239 (talk) 09:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to know when we ever thought of children as mere objects... Dismas|^(talk) 10:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

In the Medeival times children were viewed as being dispensable, not important etc, can you help me with my question now please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.18.239 (talk) 10:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's not true...as far as I am aware, in agrarian cultures, children are very important, as they will help work the land, and take care of their parents when the parents are too old. That was as true in the middle ages as it is now. For nobility, children were important to carry on the family name - for some people having a child was extremely important, at least a male child! But surely in some places at some times for some people, children were dispensable and unimportant - which is also true today. Since the child death rate was so high, it is sometimes claimed that parents remained detached from their children until it was obvious they would survive, which could take a few years. I'm not sure how accurate that is - the human instinct to care for a child must override that, I would think. Have you looked at http://historymedren.about.com/od/medievalchildren/Medieval_Children.htm this webpage from about.com? You should probably also look at the book "Medieval Children" by Nicholas Orme. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Adam. That was my point. Children have been valuable for all time, as far as I know. Granted, parents may wait till the child is older to really count on it being a productive part of the family/tribe but it was still a blow to the family if they perished. Dismas|^(talk) 12:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I really hope the anon comes back with a source for his second assertion above. That would make interesting reading. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 13:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Can i just say having read through this how rude you all are in your replies when someone clearly needs your help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.18.239 (talk) 13:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

We are helping! I even gave you a link and a book. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

And you can help us by telling us the basis on which you say that children in medieval times were viewed as unimportant. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 14:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

There is a large and interesting literate on the history of childhood, but unfortunately this area is a rather specialized and not-well-known academic discipline and so Wikipedia offers up nothing on it. Google "history of childhood" and you'll find lots of syllabi for university courses on the subject with lots of possible reading. From what I understand, most of the change is not in the value of children but the expectations of childhood safety, the definitions of "childhood" itself (e.g. what would have one time been legally an adult is still a child today), and the partitioning of other life-stages relative to childhood (e.g. the idea of the category of "adolescence" as a transition period from child to adult). Like much of the history of psychology and history of medicine, a base tenet of this approach is to not assume that the current categories we use for such things have been set in stone (or nature, to be more specific), that they are human constructions that change with culture and context, and that the idea of reading evolutionary history through the lens of modern notions of families and children is rather silly. Anyway, it's not a subject I know a lot about, but it is interesting. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 14:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Our article at childhood is very short but the bibliography is extensive. Captain RefDesk is correct about university syllabi, but be aware that some of the courses may be entitled "history of the family" or somesuch. Also note the inherent ambiguity of the word "child", e.g. the importance of having children. The English language uses the word for both "minors" and "progeny", and the two are not the same. Good luck, and please feel free to contribute to the childhood article. BrainyBabe (talk) 14:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The article is helpful – the OP seems to be asking why children were important as labour but not as vulnerable humans with rights. (This lack of status also applied to adults who were not of the privileged classes.) When the Victorian era created the idea of childhood and the Factory Act helped, it's in the context of human rights being an evolving thing anyway, gradually incorporating more minorities as awareness and lobbying grew. You could point to Dr Spock in the 50's as advocating permissiveness that lead to the shift in power between parents and children. As offspring of the Me Generation (people born from the 1970's on) another kind of importance has been constructed for children as consumers with their own buying power, peer pressure systems and their power to pressure parents to buy. There's a book, Generation Me and other good links online. Unfortunately the impulse to exploit children for economic reasons has raised its ugly head yet again. In China, there's the Little Emperor Syndrome. Julia Rossi (talk) 22:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

82.0, I must say I'm really quite baffled why you should conclude that the early responses you received to your question, particularly from Adam, were in any way 'rude.' I rather suspect it is because the answers simply do not fit the preconceptions so obviously contained in the form of your question. Forgive me for being so blunt, but the notion that children in the Middle Ages were perceived as 'objects' is really dreadfully old-fashioned, utterly out of step with contemporary thinking on the topic. And the literature on this area is huge. You would have to go back almost fifty years to find a view anywhere close to yours, to the work of Philippe Ariès, the French Medievalist, who in his Centuries of Childhood argued that childhood was not a distinct cultural period until the 16th or 17th centuries, and that the Middle Ages lacked any such concept. But even Ariès would have baulked at the suggestion of children as objects.

I am reluctant, I confess, to proceed any further, in the expectation that I, too, will be dismissed as 'rude.' However, I take the view that answers here are of interest to the general community, not just those who post the questions; so, on that basis I will now proceed to address the issue in the politest and most objective way I can.

People are always people, and there is no reason to suppose that Medieval parents did not treat their little ones with as much love and affection as those today. Of course, there are always exceptions, and people were more subject to the vagaries of circumstances, particularly economic circumstances, in the past than they are in modern societies; at least in the developed world. However, Medieval sources provide plenty of evidence that attitudes towards childhood have varied remarkably little over time, although, of course, there was a much greater emphasis on corporal punishment in the past. Allowing for all due differences in lifestyle and culture, Medieval children grew up in much the same way as children today.

Let's begin by looking at the very first stages of life. Writing in the thirteenth century, Bartholomew of England observed "The mother loves her own child most tenderly, embraces and kisses it, nurses and cares for it most solicitously." About the same time, Philip of Navara said;

God gave children three gifts: to love and recognise the person who nurses him at her breast; to show 'joy and love' to those who play with him; and to inspire love and tenderness in those who rear him, of which the last is the most important, for 'without this, they will be so dirty and annoying in infancy and so naughty and capricious that it is hardly worth nurturing them through childhood'.

In Montaillou, his seminal study of life in a French village, Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie documents the affectionate interplay between parents and babies, including adults enjoying the sensation of a baby’s skin against there own. In the circumstances of the day, given the low level of medical knowledge, and the general problems caused by hygiene and the transmission of disease, a great many babies and young children died, but again there is ample evidence that these losses were felt severely.

Medieval adults, moreover, had a clear concept of childhood as a distinct phase of life. They believed, in other words, that children progressed through a series of stages, the so-called 'ages of man', each with its own specific features. This was recognised also by both the church and the state: children below the 'age of majority', generally reckoned in the high Middle Ages as between 12 and 14, were not expected to undertake the same religious and legal obligations as adults. When they committed sins, or breached the code of law, they were generally treated with greater leniency than adults.

When children took ill there is again ample evidence that parents did everything in their power to deal with the problem. In some cases this involved, often at considerable expense, trips to sacred shrines, to pray for divine intervention. At Canterbury in the late twelfth century we hear, for example, of one Guibert of Thanet bringing his crippled daughter to the shrine of Thomas Becket, the two walking the whole way, the little girl supporting herself on a staff. Another man came from Folkestone on horseback with his seven-year-old daughter, who could not feed herself because of crippled fingers. Many other parents made the same journey, inspired by stories of St. Thomas' miraculous cures.

Children were also expected to have their own society, with codes of conduct developed in interaction with their fellows. In 1398, the English writer John Trevisa observed that the young "love talkings and counsels of such children as they are, and foresake and avoid the company of the old." The important point here is that children were given the liberty to develop their own unique customs and culture, and there is a lot of recorded detail, concerning the games, rhymes and songs of the time. Play is also well-recorded. In the fifteenth century, the poet John Lydgate mentions running, leaping, singing, dancing, wrestling, climbing trees to steal fruit, football, chess and many other such games. The paintings of Brueghel the Elder give depictions of some of these activities. Similar depictions are to be found in marginal illustrations of the fourteenth century Romance of Alexander, which also show children on hobby horses and playing blind man's buff.

There were also toy manufacturers who catered specifically for children. In the London of 1300 boys could buy model knights and other such toys. These, I think it worth stressing, were not hand made, but cast in moulds, and therefore mass produced. Miniature domestic items were also produced for girls; plates, bowls, jugs and the like. Children's literature, moreover, can be traced as far back as the reign of Richard II.

Education was also important for Medieval parents, and there were a great many schools, though these benefited boys more than girls, who trended to receive what education they had at home from their mothers. The curriculum may have been more limited than today, but masters were no less keen for their charges to develop their imaginations, and pupils were encouraged to write about the things that they liked in their notebooks. A number of these survive after 1400, with scraps of songs and riddles.

Yes, life may have been different. Yes, there were risks. But children were still children; subjects, not objects.

If you are truly interested in this there is an ample literature. Beyond the work of Nicholas Orme-to which Adam has referred you-I would mention Childhood in the Middle Ages by S Sharar; Childhood in Anglo-Saxon England by S Crawford; The Ties that Bound: Peasant Families in Medieval England by B. Hanawalt; and The Rescue of the Innocents: Endangered Children in Medieval Miracles by R. C. Finucane. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict: it seems I have clashed with Clio. But here it is, anyway):

The notion that we are somehow superior to cultures and people from the past is prevalent amongst the public and, unfortunately, also occurs amongst academics as well, and gives rise to all sorts of nonsense. That medieval people did not love or treasure their children is just another of those myths. It was given credence by Philippe Ariès in his 1960 book Centuries of Childhood, with the outrageous statement that "in medieval society, the idea of childhood did not exist". This was taken up by other scholars, it seems almost uncritically, and regurgitated ever since. For example, Barbara Tuchman (relying heavily on Aries) echoed similar thoughts in her history A Distant Mirror (1978), and said: "Of all the characteristics in which the medieval age differs from the modern, none is so striking as the comparative absence of interest in children." (p. 49) This whole myth has been thoroughly debunked by recent scholars, such as Nicholas Orme, who have carried out rigorous studies of primary sources (of which there are many dealing with children). There is little evidence to support such a view as Aries’s; most suggests the opposite.

Medieval people […] had concepts of what childhood was, and when it began and ended. The arrival of children in the world was a notable event, and their upbringing and education were taken seriously. The Church and common (secular) law regarded children as equal to adults for some purposes. Equally, both branches of authority accepted that children were not yet adults and required separate treatment. Adults provided culture for children by means of toys, games, literature, but children created their own as well. (Orme, pp. 5-6

Orme concludes that there have been bad parents and good parents in all periods, and medieval children were "ourselves, five hundred or a thousand years ago." Do read Orme, he is fascinating. But there are also other good histories by Shulamith Shahar (Childhood in the Middle Ages) and Sally Crawford (Childhood in Anglo-Saxon England). Gwinva (talk) 00:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Another example of children acting the same as children today is from William of Tyre - when the future King Baldwin IV of Jerusalem was a child, he and his friends were pinching each other to see who could withstand the most pain. Sounds like a typical day of high school, doesn't it? (Baldwin, by the way, didn't feel anything at all, which William unfortunately recognized as a sign of leprosy.) (And my apologies for once again using an example from the crusades!) Adam Bishop (talk) 01:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.210.170.49 (talk)

The Curse of the Pharaohs

The article Curse of the Pharaohs states that "A study showed that of the 58 people who were present when the [Tutankhamun] tomb and sarcophagus were opened, only eight died within a dozen years." This assertion is not sourced, but the article goes on to cite an article on Howard Carter which states that "Twelve members of the original group that had been present at the opening of the tomb died within the next seven years", which is obviously inconsistent with the Wikipedia article. Is there any reliable data on how many actually there were in the group, and how many of them died within 7/10/12 years? Many thanks. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 14:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I found this mention of James Randi looking at actuarial tables[12]; and [13]] puts it at between 11 and 21 people dying, then I saw your word "reliable". What the heck, here it is anyway. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Disarmament in Afghanistan

How can this goal be accomplished and what are some of the possible solutions? Yellowhighlight (talk) 16:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course, the goal of ISAF isn't really disarmament; The ISAF wants to arm the Afghan government forces while keeping arms out of the hands of the Taliban or their sympathisers. The issue is complex and debatable. See a review of Quick Impact Projects here [14], for an example of the actual complexity not often elaborated upon in mainstream media. Vance.mcpherson (talk) 00:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

How quickly can a team of doctors or forensic pathologists examine a fresh massacre site for signs of rape and mutilations?

This may be a strange question, but nevertheless. In country "A" on September 3 and during the following few days there were some massacres in and around a city that was behind the front lines. Number of victims perhaps 300 - 400. The site of the massacres was shortly thereafter overrun by troops from country "B", who discovered the massacre. The International Red Cross sent a committee consisting of doctors from neutral countries to investigate, which they did on September 26. They concluded that many of the victims of the massacre had been raped and horribly mutilated before death. My question is this, how easy is it to determine such matters? could the rapes and mutilations have been faked given that apparently the investigation only lasted one day, i.e. can the investigation have been thorough enough to give a verdict regarding the mutilations of many of the victims? It has been claimed by a person from side "A" that the bodies could have been mutilated after death by representatives of side "B" to make side "A" look even worse. Is it enough to superficially examine the body to determine if a rape or other mutilation was faked, or do you have to do a in depth investigation. Is one day enough for determining the truthfullness of rapes and mutilations in a massacre of this size? For those curious the source is this, and the discussion that prompted the question is here, but it would be good if you could answer first.--Stor stark7 ^Talk 16:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I think telling post mortem from premortem wounds is (at least nowadays) usually fairly easy presuming the corpses are still resonaby intact, as such you could probably tell whether someone was mutilated postmortem or premorterm fairly fast and it wouldn't be hard to tell if someone was mutilated particularly if we are talking about multiple and severe mutilations. As for rape, since I think it's reasonable to presume there very fairly brutal rapes and since it's unlikely that many of the victims had engaged in rough sex recently, I think it would be fairly easy to tell that a rape had likely occured. So I would say it would be fairly easy for a team of say 10 doctors to conclude that rapes and mutilations and that these had occured pre mortem. Note that unless for some reason absolute numbers are vital, even if it's true that some examinations may have been mishandled, I find it hard to believe multiple people would would have come to the same conclusion for multiple corpses and every single one of them was wrong. In other words, at worst the numbers (both of victims and perhaps of severity) may be slightly exagaturated but the main conclusion would probably still be correct. Of course a longer investigation would be ideal (and may be necessary for a court case), but in war, sadly more time is usually a luxury. Presuming these doctors were really neutral and had never cast doubt on their conclusions, I would find it hard to question their conclusions, especially based on the claims of one potentially biased alleged witness Nil Einne (talk) 18:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Answers to the above should be qualified with specific context (Talk:Bloody Sunday (1939)) - i.e. that the scene of the alleged crime, and the investigations, would be controlled and overseen by Nazi Germany, who had a vested interested in exaggerating, if not outright manufacturing, of such evidence.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Tsar Nicholas

the communists took decision to place the tsar on trial. why instead was he murdered? —Preceding unsigned comment added by V N Rosenfeld (talk • contribs) 19:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

According to Trotsky, Sverdlov told him that Lenin and his immediate entourage had decided to "execute" the imperial family because "We... shouldn't leave the Whites a living banner to rally around under the present difficult circumstances". Of course, it suited Lenin to pretend publicly that the Ural Regional Soviet had taken the decision. Why wasn't the Tsar put on trial? Essentially because the case against him was so weak. There was less potential danger for the cause of the Bolsheviks in isolating him and (in the end) murdering him. Xn4 00:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

This is an interesting question, V N, which reveals much about the inner workings of the Bolshevik Party at the time. The official story given out was that the task had been delegated to the Ural Soviet, though the murder of the Tsaritsa Alexandra and the five children was kept secret for over a year after the event. Anyway, I've copied below a previous answer I gave to a related question, which provides some background detail. Clio the Muse (talk) 01:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

It is still not been proved conclusively just how the decision to kill the family was arrived at; if it was central, or if it was local; and, if central, who exactly was involved. However, I can offer you a reasonable amount of circumstantial evidence that points quite firmly at Moscow.

For the Ural Soviet the presence of the royal family at Yekaterinburg was a growing concern, especially as the Czech Legion and other White forces approaching the town from the east. Rather than risk moving them they decided on execution, though they were unwilling to act without the approval the Council of Commissars in Moscow. Ivan Goloschekin, a member of the Ural Soviet who also happened to be a friend of Yakov Sverdlov, a close political associate of Lenin, was sent to Moscow to take soundings on the matter. He was told by Sverdlov that the government was still considering putting Nicholas on trial, an idea favoured by Trotsky. However, the steady advance of the Whites towards Yekaterinburg changed this, and Goloschekin was able to return with the news that Moscow had delegated the whole business to the Ural Soviet.

With Lenin's permission Sverdlov formally announced the death of Nicholas at a meeting of the Executive Council on 18 July 1918. Nothing was said of the fate of the Empress Alexandra and the five children, though an official statement was issued that they had all been moved. However, both Lenin and Sverdlov knew that they were all dead. They had been so advised by telegram from Yekaterinburg. The statement was a lie.

A year passed before the government admitted that they had all been shot, though the Social Revolutionaries were blamed. However, the real link between Moscow and the Urals was later made clear in a conversation between Sverdlov and Trotsky. Trotsky reports this in his memoirs thus;

"My next visit to Moscow took place after the fall of Yekaterinburg. Talking to Sverdlov, I asked in passing: 'Oh, yes, and where is the Tsar?

'It's all over,' he answered. 'He has been shot.'

'And where is the family?'

'And the family along with him.'

'All of them?', I asked, apparently with a touch of surprise.

'All of them,' replied Sverdlov. 'What about it?' He was waiting to see my reaction, I made no reply.

'And who made the decision?', I asked.

'We decided it here. Ilych [Lenin] believed that we shouldn't leave the Whites a live banner to rally round, especially under the present difficult circumstances.'

I did not ask any further questions and considered the matter closed. Actually, the decision was not only expedient but necessary. The severity of the summary justice showed the world that we would continue to fight mercilessly, stopping at nothing. The execution of the Tsar's family was needed not only in order to frighten, horrify, and dishearten the enemy, but also in order to shake up our own ranks to show that there was no turning back, that ahead lay only complete victory or complete ruin...This Lenin sensed well."

Sverdlov was certainly implicated in the murder of the entire family. It is difficult to accept that he would not have cleared this with Lenin, who, in my estimation, is guilty by association. He certainly deserves part of the 'credit' for this atrocity. Clio the Muse 00:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Since I wrote this I now have sufficient leads to conclude that there was something else at work, an indication that the Tsar and his family were early victims of the forms of struggle that were to become commonplace among the Bolsheviks in years to come. Although approved by the Central Committee the projected trial of the Tsar was very much Trotsky's favoured project, one where he would have appeared as prosecutor-in-chief. It would have added greatly to his prestige, and Sverdlov knew this. You see, the ideological struggles of the pre-Revolution days were about to give way to struggles over power. Sverdlov understood this in the way that Trotsky did not; and it was Sverdlov-in collaboration with the Ural Soviet-who did his best to undermine the projected trial.

Take a look again at the exchange reported by Trotsky in his Memoirs-it shows his surprise and Sverdlov's gleeful defiance. It's almost as if he is inviting Trotsky to object, which clearly he could not do. He had been outmaneuvered, decisively so, and his subsequent gloss was little more than a feeble attempt to make the best of the situation. In this, Sverdlov, the administrator, represented the Party, the old Bolshevik core, against the mercurial Trotsky, the former Menshevik. Sverdlov died in 1919, but the challenge to Trotsky was soon to be taken up by an even more formidable opponent Clio the Muse (talk) 01:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Jefferson in Boston?

Did Thomas Jefferson ever visit Boston? If so, when, for how long, for what purposes...i.e., anything anyone can tell me. Thx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.29.113 (talk) 19:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Traveling to take up his duties in France, Jefferson arrived in Boston 18 June, 1784. There he found Abigail Adams was then thirty-six hours from sailing, though he wished to accompany her on the crossing he was unable to make preparations in time. Jefferson could find no other ship bound for France, and considered returning to New York to take passage on the French packet sailing 15 July. Nathaniel Tracy of Newburyport, a merchant and financier of the Revolution, convinced him to sail aboard Ceres, bound for London 3 July.

Jefferson spent three days in Boston before traveling to Salem, Ipswich, Marblehead, Newbury, Portsmouth, and Exeter. He was back in Boston on the 26th, where he sold his horse, "Assurcagoa" to a Neil Jameson for £30. He purchased four dozen bottles of hock, apples, oranges, bedding, a chamber pot, and a table and chair. He paid a Colonel Ingersoll £22/17 for lodging during the stay in Boston, which ended at 4 o'clock the morning of 5 July when Ceres sailed under the command of a Captain St. Barbe. Kimball, M. G. (1947). Jefferson, war and peace, 1776 to 1784. New York: Coward-McCann. pp. 360-2. OCLC 425098. As far as i can tell, this was Jefferson's first, and maybe only, visit to Boston.—eric 05:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Jefferson penned a letter to Elbridge Gerry before he sailed, which may describe the stay in more detail, but i'm unable to find a copy.—eric 05:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if that was Thomas Ingersoll? Adam Bishop (talk) 12:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hebraisms, the New Testament and the Book of Mormon

Your Hebraism article states that the New Testament may have been originally written in Hebrew, rather than Greek. Is this view commonly held?

The article also suggests that there are "numerous" Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon. Does any research who is not a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints subscribe to this view? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.147.38.85 (talk) 20:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that any serious modern scholar believes that the new Testament was originally written in Hebrew; however, some believe that there may have been an early "Sayings Document" of quotations from Jesus, written in the Aramaic language. AnonMoos (talk) 05:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone tell me if this is true?

Move to miscellaneous.

Usage of Nazi-era sources by postwar German historians

In a recent discussion (at Talk:Bloody Sunday (1939)) an issue has arose - how reliable is modern German historiography (unfortunately we are still missing an article on this general subject) in relation to usage of Nazi-era sources (reports of Nazi officials, eyewitnesses, etc.). Are there any works that discuss this issue? Are there any German (or non-German) historians who have been criticized for reliance on Nazi sources (other than the notorious case of David Irving)? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It is, I admit, a while since I studied this area of German history, Piotrus, but I am not mindful of any German historians, those worthy, that is, of the label of historian, who were in any way guilty of misusing the sources. In studying this period the sources left by the Nazis are invaluable because of the circumstances in which they were made available. The Third Reich was a state torn up by the roots, so the documents left reveal almost everything about the inner workings of the whole apparatus, including the kind of things normally kept secret for some time after, or never revealed at all. It reveals, in other words, the kind of things that even in the democratic societies of today, with degrees of freedom of information, are still held for prolonged periods from public scrutiny.

Of course, any historian-as I feel sure you are aware-has to enter into a critical relationship with the sources; questioning, interrogating and cross-referencing at every stage. Someone who attempted to build a superstructure on a foundation of fragments would be quickly exposed as unscholarly, even potentially fraudulent. Even David Irving for all his faults, does not, so far as I am aware, invent documents and sources; he simply constructs a burden of interpretation which they do not support. More than that, his chief fault is one of scholarly bad-faith, a deliberate obfuscation of how the Nazi state worked as a whole , which he himself understands, but misleads others in his pursuit of a political agenda. Mainstream German scholarship, represented by the likes of Karl Dietrich Bracher, Joachim Fest and the like, is in no way guilty of these forms of corruption. Clio the Muse (talk) 01:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Woman on the stage in Germany

Women first appeared on the stage in England in 1660, but when did they first do so in Germany? Actor has no information on this issue for European countries other than England. Luwilt (talk) 13:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe the earliest recorded German actress on the public stage was the wife of Johann Velthen (or Veltheim). He had formed a company of actors from among the students of the University of Leipzig in about 1669, and he employed his wife and other women for performances in the 1680s. After Velthen's death in 1693, his widow took over the company, so she was also the first German woman to be a theatrical manager. Xn4 23:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

P. S. - The Restoration is remembered as the time when women first appeared on English stages in public, but it seems some women had begun to appear in private performances a little earlier. For instance, according to Samuel Pepys, a Mrs Coleman played in The Siege of Rhodes when it was first performed in a private theatre at William Davenant's Rutland House in 1656. Davenant had to get permission for this performance from Cromwell, whose government had banned all drama and closed the public theatres. Xn4 23:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Though she spoke Dutch, Ariana Nozeman performed in Germany before the 1660s.

Until 1990, only women who were unmarried and younger than 35 were allowed to participate for one of the few and minor female parts in the Oberammergauer Passionsspiele, but I don't know whether any women already participated in 1634.

Anyway, I believe Xn4 is correct. This book examines the history of women in German traveling theatres from 1670 to 1760. The review site says there were no women in German troupes until 1654 (without mentioning the first one's name), but the actresses caught up quickly: As Xn4 mentioned, Catharina Elisabeth Velten was also the first female "Prinzipal" (director of a traveling company or "Deutsche Wanderbühne"), and after years of seeing men interpret women's parts, she turned the tables and became a pioneer of the breeches role as well.

Velthen doesn't have an article on any Wikipedia, unfortunately, but German Wikipedia has one on Friederike Caroline Neuber (1697 - 1760), another early German actress with a remarkable biography. ---Sluzzelin talk 18:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

martinique 1762

who were the french regerment based their before the british attacked it 1762 ? 217.171.129.79 (talk) 22:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I cannot say which particular regiment, or regiments, the French deployed, but the total defensive force amounted to 1200 regulars (probably a mixed formation), 7000 locally recruited militia, and 4000 privateers or mercenaries. You might wish to consult the article on the British expedition against Martinique. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:00, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Concept of the Devil

Does Islam have a concept of the Devil, Satan, or Beelzebub like Judaism and Christianity or supposedly only one of God? In other words, while I know that for a Christan killing one's self for any purpose, especially as a means of killing others, would be deemed an act on behalf of or in the spirit of the Devil rather than an act on behalf of or in the spirit of God. 71.100.173.69 (talk) 23:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

See the article on Iblis ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 23:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Why then do we not hear Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden decried as agents of Iblis by the Muslim World? 71.100.173.69 (talk) 00:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Have you ever heard anyone decried as agients of Iblis? I don't think Muslims necessarily think in the same way about this as Christians may. Someone may be bad or even evil, without having to be though of as agents of Iblis. Perhaps on the metaphorical sense, you could say based on their beliefs that's what they effectively are but it doesn't mean they think of it in that way. And most of the Muslim world does say Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda are bad and un-Islamic. Nil Einne (talk) 02:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Besides, try this Google search. --Allen (talk) 04:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, see Shaitan. BrainyBabe (talk) 21:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

April 2

Law factors

What factors would a defense lawyer consider in challenging the legality of a confession? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Mustafa (talk • contribs) 00:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The term "the legality of a confession" is an odd one. In most places, a supposed confession can't itself be called lawful or unlawful. You may mean its admissibility (the points to be taken on that vary a lot from one legal system to another) and its value as evidence (ditto). Sadly, even in countries which pride themselves on their respect for the rule of law, many 'confessions' are obtained under duress or at a time when the person confessing a crime is confused or sleep-deprived or sick (physically or mentally), has been denied relevant information (such as being put on notice that he or she may have committed a crime), and so forth. All of the circumstances of a supposed confession and of the state of mind of the person making it need to be gone through carefully. Xn4 00:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Trying to identify a painting

I have a photograph of a room which has a painting hanging on the wall. Actually, it is a poster print of a painting, leading me to believe that the painting is well-known. I wonder whether anyone might recognise or be able to identify the painting (or even just the artist); if so, I would much appreciate it. The photo is here. Thanks greatly in advance! Heather (talk) 00:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a Matisse. Julia Rossi (talk) 01:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's Matisse's Seated Odalisque, at the Baltimore Museum of Art. See this page, about halfway down. Deor (talk) 01:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Addendum: According to our article Cone sisters, the full (English) name of the painting is Seated Odalisque, Left Knee Bent, Ornamental Background and Checkerboard. Deor (talk) 02:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow; thanks so much! I really appreciate it! Heather (talk) 16:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The word "odalisque" is an interesting one. In modern English it has overtones of loucheness, but literally it means a virgin slave, usually within a harem. (French it is much the same.) In the nineteenth century art movement of Orientalism, odalisques were a popular subject: see here and a detailed list here. Context is all! BrainyBabe (talk) 21:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Dunbar Robbery Page, Cite Help!

Hey, first time using the Reference Desk. The Dunbar Robbery Page, Dunbar Armored robbery, doesn't have a SINGLE source! Not one! I've been trying to find some for quite a while now, and amazingly I've been rather disapointed. I've been given this: http://www.answers.com/topic/dunbar-armored-robbery?cat=entertainment , but if you look carefully, its citing WIKIPEDIA! Thats been it. Can anyone help me find a source for this thing? Thanks in advance! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paladin Hammer (talk • contribs) 02:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

This would seem to be one reliable source for the contents of the article. Others can be found by Googling for "Dunbar Armored" + "Allen Pace". I'm not sure, however, that the current title of the article is the most felicitous possible one, since the company in question seems to have been robbed at least two other times. Deor (talk) 02:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help Deor! I'll post a question on the pages discussion about the name. Paladin Hammer (talk) 03:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

British Navy and Spanish Civil War

Why did they play a role in it as we can appreciate in the Battle of Cape Palos?--85.180.13.67 (talk) 02:47, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The main role was enforcing a rather problematic arms embargo. AnonMoos (talk) 05:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The article only mentions the British Navy as rescuing survivors and being attacked while transferring those survivors to a Spanish ship. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:31, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Rules of being a good Muslim

A week or so ago I was listening to a show on NPR, I've forgotten which one, and they were talking to a bunch of American men who were converting/had converted to Islam. They were talking about the changes in the men's lives and how it was different from their previous life and such. Two examples that they mentioned were not being able to have a dog as a pet since dogs are seen as unclean or something like that and not being able to do anything more than glance at attractive women. I had never heard of these particular requirements of the faith. So can someone point me to a list or something of the ilk that explains other sorts of nuances like this? Not that I'm thinking of converting... I couldn't follow those first two, let alone more!  :-) Dismas|^(talk) 04:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Five Pillars of Islam? x42bn6 Talk Mess 05:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Oops, nevermind... It's right there in front of my face basically. Just go to any of the pages about Islam and the template on the right has links to culture sorts of articles about the faith. Dismas|^(talk) 05:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

IANA Imam or any sort of learned person but AFAIK you may keep dogs for protection or e.g. a guide dog if you're blind, but not as pets as they are considered unclean. As far as looking at women, you are allowed one glance (you cannot help if your eyes are drawn to the person) but to continue to look/leer is not permitted. Islam values modesty very highly, hence the strict dress code for men and women. Zunaid©® 05:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

For exploring this kind of issues our article on Ahkam, which is about what you should and should not do, is a good entry point. Keep in mind though that there is no central authority in Islam, and accordingly different Muslims have different interpretations of various issues, and cultural views on propriety in man–woman relations are often given an unwarranted religious justification. Like in Judaism there are extremely rigid and literally-minded interpretations and fairly liberal ones. Also, apart from the interpretations, not all Muslims are equally punctual and strict in applying all rules, just as many Catholics routinely skip the Sunday mass, but new converts can be expected to be scrupulous about petty things. There is a hierarchy ranging from wajib (an obligation for a Muslim) to haraam (prohibited). Adultery is haraam, and even coveting thy neighbour's wife, something that is also illegal in other Abrahamic religions. But belly dancing is an art that is highly appreciated in the Muslim heartlands, and it is not only ugly hags that perform, nor are the dancers covered in burqas. Next to the wajib–haraam scale there is the issue that certain obligatory acts (such as praying) require a Muslim to be clean, and that it is forbidden to eat unclean things (see Halal). What touches a dog becomes unclean and must be thoroughly washed to become clean again (see Unclean_animals#Dogs). That does not keep many people in Turkey, almost all of who are Muslims, from having pet dogs.  --Lambiam 08:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I remember seeing a documentary about (the ppl of) Iran. One the many things mentioned is that many ppl in Teheran have dogs and that they like them. However this fact supposedly is never mentioned in Iranian newspapers because dogs are "unclean". I think that it is the same in all muslim countries. But seriously, the only single important rule in the "do and don't department" is the following: Don't get caught. Flamarande (talk) 12:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Stuka effectiveness

Just how effective was the Stuka dive bomber as a weapon of war? I've heard conflicting stories. Brewer Droop (talk) 08:07, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Have you read Junkers Ju 87? Quick answer: they were very effective initially, when the Germans had air superiority, as they did during the Fall of France and the early stages of the war in the east, but "the Stuka suffered from low speed and poor maneuverability, with little defensive armament, making it highly vulnerable to enemy fighters." Clarityfiend (talk) 08:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Brewer Droop, I, quite frankly, would ignore the statement in the Wikipedia article that the Stuka was ever an effective weapon of war, a contention that does little more than demonstrate the long reach of German propaganda. Its banshee-like wailing may have caused terror; but as a precision instrument it was a dismal failure. During the Polish campaign, for example, the German 10th Army had no less than 114 Stukas and 20 elderly Henschel 123 biplanes; but it was the performance of the Henschels that most impressed the British military observers.

In the French campaign the Stukas are supposed to have shattered the enemy defensive positions along the River Meuse; but the bombing, in fact, had little impact. In the end Erwin Rommel's Ghost Division was able to force a crossing with virtually no air support. Stukas accounted for less than 100 tons of the 550 tons dropped on French lines during the attack. It was also during this campaign that the Stukas showed just how vulnerable to fighter interception, twelve being downed in one day in May by five American built Curtis Hawk 75 fighters in the French air force. In the Dunkirk campaign the Stuka attacks were directed against British shipping; but the most serious damage was caused by Junker 88s. To cap all this, in the very early stages of the Battle of Britain the Stuka was shown to be a dismal failure, and was soon withdrawn. Operation Barbarossa did little to revive their fading reputation. Once again, as in the Polish campaign, the old Henschels proved to be much more effective, flying three times as many missions per plane as the Stuka. Myths die hard. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Female Pilots

Did the RAF have any female pilots in the Second World War? Brewer Droop (talk) 08:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

There was the Women's Auxiliary Air Force, but they apparently didn't go into combat. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The WAAF didn't fly either. The Air Transport Auxiliary did - they ferried planes (including combat planes) from one place to another, 'behind the lines', and they included women pilots, but they weren't part of the RAF. So technically the answer to the question is "no". There were women pilots, and there were women in the Air Force, but there were no women RAF pilots. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The British Government didn't order gender equality among RAF pilots until the early 1990s. See Malcolm Rifkind's speech in 1993 for reference: "Since the last RAF debate, all aircrew roles have been opened to women, including those on fast jets. Two female pilots and nine female navigators have entered squadron service. A further 29 female pilots and 13 female navigators are undergoing training."

The RAF's own history site features the milestone: "1991 – Flight Lieutenant Jo Salter became the RAF’s first female pilot. Flight Lieutenant Jo Salter became the first female fast-jet pilot in 1994. Since then, many female pilots have followed in her footsteps." ---Sluzzelin talk 14:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

DJ Clayworth is spot on. In WWII, so far as I know, the Red Air Force was the only one to routinely have women flying as combat pilots. Indeed, the first-ever female combat pilot was probably a Russian, but that was in the First World War.

Princess Evgenia M[?]vna Shakhovskaia (Evgenia Shakhovskaia) volunteered to fly with the Imperial Russian Air Service in August 1914. She was accepted, commissioned as an ensign (2nd lieutenant) and probably flew combat missions as a reconnaissance pilot in the 1st Air Detachment, attached to the Northwest Front. Shakovskaia had an interesting life. She was later arrested on charges of treason and sentenced to death. The Tsar commuted the sentence to perpetual imprisonment in a convent. She was killed in the Civil War in a rather bizarre episode: she shot one of her Bolshevik colleagues, perhaps in while under the influence of narcotics, and was shot in return by another colleague. Oh! Those crazy Russians!

Another early female military flier was Liubov A[?]vna Golanchikova (Liubov Golanchikova), an actress (stage name Molly More). She learned to fly in 1911. During the war she flew mainly as a test pilot. During the Civil War she mainly served as an instructor for the Red Air Fleet, but did fly some combat missions.

Another competitor would be Elena P[?]vna Samsonova (Elena Samsonova), who raced cars before the war. She served with the Imperial Russian Army as a volunteer nurse and then driver. Having learned to fly before the war, she volunteered for the IRAS and flew reconnaissance missions for the 9th Army. Her commanding officer removed her from flying duties after a short time. Under the Provisional Government, she returned to flying reconnaissance and artillery spotting missions as an observer rather than a pilot.

Next in the list, Princess Sophia A[?]vna Dolgorukaia (Sofia Dolgorukaia). Another motor racer, Dolgorukaia almost inevitably learned to fly as well. She didn't join up until 1917 when the Provisional Government started recruiting women. My book says "Little is known of her military flying career.

Finally we have the first woman combat pilot to be wounded in action. Middle class, from Kiev, rather than a princess or society figure, Nadezhda Degtereva joined up in 1914, aged 17; she is said to have had a friend take the medical for her to disguise her sex. During the fighting in Galicia in 1915, Degtereva, flying a reconnaissance mission, was attacked by Austro-Hungarian fighters and hit more than once. She managed to get her plane back to base, but in hospital her secret was discovered. She was promoted to the rank of sergeant and sent the Caucausus Front. That's all I can find.

Apart from Degtereva, all of these women had learned to fly before the war. Indeed, only two Russian women who held pilot's licenses seem not to have flown with the military in some capacity. The exceptions were Lidia Zvereva, first Russian female pilot, was part owner of a busy aircraft factory. It seems possible, but I do not know for sure, that the third Russian female pilot, Evdokia Anatra, was a relation of Artur Antonovich Anatra, owner of the Anatra aircraft company. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

For Russian female aviators in the Second World War see the Night Witches. They scared the hell out of the Germans! Clio the Muse (talk)

Wood and canvas bi-planes – they must have had no nerves! Julia Rossi (talk) 01:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Football (soccer) Clubs in world stock markets.

Which Fooball Clubs are currently in world stock markets? Is there any way to find or create a complete list? Tcalika (talk) 12:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)Tcalika

This has a list of English clubs that are, but it's from 2005. This says Sporting and Porto are listed in Portugal. Recury (talk) 13:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Are Americans worried of recession?

Even if there is a recession, America's per capita GDP would be around $45k. There are many countries where GDP/C is $2000. Why Americans are worried? Maybe you Americans know why whereas I don't know because I am not there. Can anyone say why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.118.254 (talk) 12:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Recessions are characterised by unemployment and downwards pressure on wages. It is no consolation to someone who cannot pay his/her mortgage, that the average PCGDP is $45k, or that the PCGDP in another country is $2k. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Lots of psychological experiments show people dislike losing stuff more than they like gaining stuff. Losing some of that great wealth will hurt, even if (from a wider perspective) they're still very well off. So it appears while money won't make you happy, losing money will make you sad - it's human nature. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

We're not worried about starving to death, if that's what you're asking. But people are worried about losing their jobs and their houses, which can happen. And if you lose your job in the US, you often lose your health insurance as well, which can have disastrous consequences that people in countries with state health care don't worry about. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 12:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

On a different note, in countries where GDP per capita is close to $2000, people can often rely on extended family members (brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins) for help if they lose their jobs. In the United States, most people are not really prepared to give food or shelter to relatives for more than maybe a few days. In an extreme situation, a person might turn to his or her parents, if they are still alive, but this is not expected, it is socially embarassing or even shameful, and it is very stressful for everyone involved. So the prospect of losing your income may be more alarming in the United States than in a poorer country. Marco polo (talk) 14:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Large investments make the situation even worse when there's a recession. Suppose the stocks decrease in value. A person who went into debt to buy stocks, if he loses his job, will lose more than the income. He'll also lose income from the stock market, and he'll have to pay back the debt with interest.

Also think about the situation this way. A person in extreme poverty (with less than a US dollar per day of income) will be overjoyed to have an annual income of $2000. He or she will not remain depressed because the average US citizen income is twenty times higher. --Bowlhover (talk) 16:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

People who have something hate losing it, they don't care about other people, they just want what they want, which is as much money as they can get. Not all people, but quite a lot. And I'm sure I remember the PCGDP in Tanzania was $38 last time I checked. Something like that. Although I suspect that comes from most people there just owning a patch of land and growing food on it and not bothering with money.HS7 (talk) 18:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

So it seems I was wrong about tanzania somehow. Or GDPs have changed a lot in the last few years. Anyway, there are lots of places though where people hardly earn any money. Not that it's really relevent to this question. HS7 (talk) 19:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Differences in income and costs shed further light on this situation. While per capita GDP in the United States is close to $45,000, the median household income in the United States is not much greater than this number. (The per capita GDP is much higher than per capita median household income because a small minority of households receive a large percentage of total income in the United States.) Half of all households have incomes lower than $48,000. Many have incomes substantially lower than this. Meanwhile, expenses in the United States are very high compared to those in a country with a per capita GDP of $2,000. For example, typical monthly housing costs range from $1,000 to $3,000. In California, New York and some other places, $5,000 per month in rent or mortgage cost is fairly common. Most families spend several hundred dollars per month on food. Because there is little public transportation and most jobs are located far from affordable housing, car ownership is a necessity in most parts of the United States. Car payments plus insurance, fuel, and maintenance easily add up to $500 or more a month. This does not include the cost of clothing, medical care, and other necessities. So, many Americans' expenses are so great that they are able to save little. Therefore, when an American loses a job, he or she faces very high expenses while trying to find another job in a tight job market, and possibly little or no savings to meet those expenses. Marco polo (talk) 20:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Fascist style

We now associate fascism with a particular type of extreme right wing, racist and nationalist politics. But that wasn't always the case. In the early days fascism, as conceived by Mussolini, was really something quite different. I'm trying to determine what gave Italian fascism it's particular character, in what ways it mutated and evolved. To put this another way, I'm trying to determine if there was a specific fascist style. Can you offer some views? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.8.81 (talk) 14:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Italian fascism had a number of interesting and not entirely expected cultural origins. It was rooted deeply in philosophy, in particular the works of Giovanni Gentile, and even in various art movements, like futurism, along with the more traditional origins in political thought (e.g. the corporatists). I would probably argue that you are looking for Fascism before it really gained a lot of power; any ideological system can have wonderful nuances and associations before it really gets down to trying to make the trains run on time, at which point things flatten out a lot. As an analog, the Marxist musings of Lenin, Trotsky, etc. before the revolution of 1917 are much more interesting and sophisticated (on the whole) than the reality of the early Soviet state. Real politics "flattens" ideology as it is mediated from the realm of thoughts and words into the area of policies, institutions, and, to put it bluntly, power, much less all the contingencies of the time (it is easy to talk about redistribution of wealth when you are in exile; it is a lot harder when you are in the middle of a civil war). --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 14:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I would have said, 217.43, that the chief advantage of Fasci italiani di combattimento in 1919 was that it was tied to no philosophy and no ideology whatsoever; that it was, in other words, organised opportunism.. This, above all, was the Fascist style. It took the shape of a chameleon, able to change colours in accordance with the political climate. Unlike the socialists, the communists, the liberals and the conservatives the movement carried nothing, no system of beliefs or organisational structure, which would prevent its rapid mutations. Fascism, above all, was a mood, one of discontent, that could combine the arditi, who simple longed for action for the sake of action, and comic-opera revolutionaries like the Futurist Marinetti, who saw politics as an escape from cultural boredom.

This was transformismo politics, one that could, in theory have taken the movement to the left, if that is where the advantage lay. But in the end the advantage, the prospects for growth, advancement and power, were on the right, in the defense of Italy against Bolshevism. The appeal to the working-class, the direction of leftwards Fascism, had failed miserably in the elections of 1919. In the end Mussolini, in alliance with conservative rural Fascists like Roberto Farinacci, took advantage of the fear among the middle-class and the peasantry of a socialist revolution. It was Fascist anti-socialism that created a mass movement, and ensured thereafter that it would always be a philosophy of the right. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Mmm, I think I would disagree. I think it is easy to see Fascism as opportunistic but that doesn't mean it didn't have ideology. The ideology was rather simple, of course: the state was the supreme unit of social action, and the state's will over the collective was imperative. Simple Hobbesianism taken to the extreme, if you want to look at it that way. But that's not a lack of philosophy or a lack of ideology, though it is easy in our current world to see it that way since we generally do take the state as the principle political actor (and not the Volk, as the Nazis had it, or the Class, as the Marxists had it). In a sense, Fascism looks philosophically base to us primarily because many of the philosophical arguments are not too different than the ones we use unconsciously today. (Hence one professor I had—a total loon, I must say—argued that in the end, Gentile was right in his descriptive account of how history/society/etc. worked.) --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 00:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I stand by what I wrote: early Fascism owed nothing to ideas and everything to action. The intellectual baggage all comes later. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Okhrana

how effective was Okhrana? —Preceding unsigned comment added by V N Rosenfeld (talk • contribs) 15:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

For a start, see Okhrana. There isn't really an answer to "How effective was the Okhrana?" - any more than there would be a simple answer to "How effective is the CIA?" If you judge by how feared it was, it was certainly seen as effective by those on the receiving end of it. It had some failures, especially in more challenging tasks. Just how good it was all depended on how good the personnel were. If you read Russian, there's a site here you may find helpful. Xn4 17:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The Okhrana, V N Rosenfeld, was generally held to be the most effective secret service of the day, so much so that Lenin later used it as a model for the Cheka. I can give you one example of their efficiency, which has some contemporary relevance. In 1909 they discovered that the terrorist Social Revolutionaries were actively planning to fly a plane loaded with dynamite into the Winter Palace. In response the Okhrana ordered that all flights be monitored, and a watch kept on all those learning to fly as well as members of private aero-clubs. As one author has rightly said "It is a mark of the Okhrana's excellence that in 1909 it was imaginative enough to envisage a crime that was beyond the scope of the FBI and the CIA in the twenty-first century". Clio the Muse (talk) 23:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes... but I'd be interested to know exactly how many aeroplanes there were in Russia in 1909, Clio! FiggyBee (talk) 05:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The Okhrana had penetrated most revolutionary and dissident groups. It was even active in London's Eastend. Manya Shochat had to kill one who gained entry to her Odessa hideout and discovered the stash of arms. AllenHansen (talk) 09:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Collier's June 8, 1956 George Barkentin's model.

George Barkentin, fabulous photographer ran an amateur beauty contest on a golf course near Jacksonville, Florida, and photographed a number of women who showed up, including students, housewives, and secretaries. The photo shoot was for these women to model swim wear. Included in the article was a photograph of two women taken in Palm Springs, California, however, one of whom was on the cover of the magazine with no accreditation given. Does anyone know who the girl on the cover is? Was she a professional model, or simply a girl next dor like the other girls in the shoot?

Thanks,

D. Kastin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.241.91.204 (talk) 16:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Medical Records release - State of Michigan

This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice. --FiggyBee (talk) 19:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Why no slave revolt in the United States?

In the nineteenth century there were major slave rebellions in Brazil, Haiti, Jamaica and other places but not in the southern United States. Why should this have been so? Also, I would like to know in what way the existence of slavery hightened sectional tensions, beyond the obvious problems caused by the admission of new states and the westward expansion of the union? Thank you. TheLostPrince (talk) 18:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

In fact, there were several slave rebellions in the southern United States, as our article shows. Among the most noted were those led by Nat Turner and Denmark Vesey. Among factors other than westward expansion that raised sectional tensions were Southern resentment of Northern Abolitionism and resentment among laborers in the North over having to compete (to some extent) in a national labor market against unpaid slaves. Southerners were particularly incensed at the efforts of Northern Abolitionists to bring slaves to freedom, for example through the Underground Railroad, while Northerners were angered by Southern claims, backed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, that slaves retained their status as property even in Northern states that had abolished slavery. Marco polo (talk) 18:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

In Haiti and Jamaica the blacks were the huge majority of the population, so the chances of success must have looked better, and indeed actually were better. A slave rebellion in the Southern U.S. was doomed unless poor whites abandoned their alliance with the planters, which they never came close to doing. (Though they should have done, as slavery was against their interests too - that's why "white trash" is associated with the south, rather than say New England). Luwilt (talk) 21:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Here's one opinion on the matter:

• "In the present state of things in the United States, I do not think a general, or even a very extensive slave insurrection is possible. The indispensable concert of action cannot be attained. The slaves have no means of rapid communication; nor can incendiary freemen, black or white, supply it. The explosive materials are everywhere in parcels; but there neither are, nor can be supplied, the indispensable connecting trains. Much is said by Southern people about the affection of slaves for their masters and mistresses; and a part of it, at least, is true. A plot for an uprising could scarcely be devised and communicated to twenty individuals before some one of them, to save the life of a favorite master or mistress, would divulge it. This is the rule; and the slave revolution in Hayti was not an exception to it, but a case occurring under peculiar circumstances. The gunpowder plot of British history, though not connected with slaves, was more in point. In that case, only about twenty were admitted to the secret; and yet one of them, in his anxiety to save a friend, betrayed the plot to that friend, and, by consequence, averted the calamity. Occasional poisonings from the kitchen, and open or stealthy assassinations in the field, and local revolts extending to a score or so, will continue to occur as the natural results of slavery; but no general insurrection of slaves, as I think, can happen in this country for a long time. Whoever much fears, or much hopes for such an event, will be alike disappointed." -- Abraham Lincoln, Cooper Union speech, February 27, 1860.

AnonMoos (talk) 23:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Marco is right, there were slave rebellions in the United States, but nothing on the scale of the Bahia Risings in Brazil, the Haitian Revolution and the Baptist War in Jamaica. The reasons why the risings in the United States were weak and sporadic is simple enough: neither demographics nor geography favoured anything more serious.

In Haiti, for example, the slave outnumbered the free population by a huge factor of eleven to one. Plantations here were the homes of hundreds of slaves, who could conspire and organise in the way their North American cousins could not. By 1860, in the southern United States, slaves accounted for less than four million of the nine million inhabitants. There were few plantations, moreover, with more than thirty slaves. The population was also relatively stable, made up of family groups who had much more to lose from insurrection. This was aided by the fact that even before the abolition of the Atlantic Slave Trade in 1807 imports of fresh slaves was in marked decline, unlike, say, Brazil.

Looking at the geographical perspective, there were few areas in the American south that could support large communities of Maroon runaways, unlike Jamaica and Brazil, where remote areas were effectively turned into guerilla bases. One has to consider also the far higher density of white people in the American south, and the existence of a transport system that allowed the rapid concentration of militia forces whenever danger threatened. There were some small Maroon communities, but they were quickly detected and destroyed. The best option for the runaway was to take refuge with pre-existing independent communities of natives. Some did indeed flee to the territories controlled by the Seminole Indians, taking part in the two Seminole Wars against the United States.

So, in short, in face of a well-armed militia, an organised system of slave patrols, an efficient road and rail network, and the absence of suitable areas in which slaves could congregate in any numbers, it is really no surprise that slave risings were small, un-coordinated and ineffective in the United States.

Now, turning to your second question, Lost Prince, slavery was an issue that was bound to introduce all sorts of tensions, threatening both the stability and the integrity of the young Union. It was an issue that the North, much as it would like to, simply could not ignore. When Andrew Jackson began the aforementioned Seminole Wars, her gave priority to the destruction of a fort held by the Maroons and the 'return of the negroes to their rightful owners.' For many in the North it looked as if the campaign in Florida was being fought specifically in the slave holding interest. Joshua Giddings, a leading abolitionist from Ohio, was later to describe Jackson's war as 'the first slave catching expedition undertaken by the Federal Government.'

Beyond that, slavery offered a challenge to notions of American liberty, in more ways than the obvious one. The existence of fugitive slaves in the north, where individual state law was based on a presupposition of freedom, created clear political and legal contradictions. When the southern states later seceded from the Union the chief motivation was held to be the defence of State's Rights. But the irony is that it was the Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850, guaranteeing the return of runaways by the Federal Government, which effectively undermined the very things that the northern states considered most important; namely state sovereignty, habeas corpus and due legal process. In other words, Federal action on behalf of southern slavers made it clear that, while an individual state may be free, it was still part of a Union that was not. Increasingly the Fugitive Slave legislation was challenged in northern courts, and some states, notably Vermont, defied Federal law by passing 'personal liberty laws', which protected free blacks and obstructed the return of fugitives. In 1854 it took as many as 1000 armed police, militia and marines, supported by artillery, to escort Anthony Burns to Boston harbour, where a ship waited to carry him back to slavery through a hostile crowd of 20,000 sullen Northerners.

This was indeed a house that could not stand. Clio the Muse (talk) 23:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Clio explains it brilliantly as usual. The Southern slave-owning population included militia members and the legal system of patrollers which could usually detect and suppress any large slave rebellion. Laws against mass assembly and literacy by slaves impeded communication and organization. Small-scale slave rebellions were ubiquitous, in response to treatment even more degrading and inhuman than was typical of the antebellum Southern US, from as simple a thing as failing to understand and follow instructions for doing some undesired task, or breaking an expensive piece of equipment, leaving a garte open so cattle got where they weren't supposed to be, or poisoning the food, or stealing something of value, or setting the house on fire, to running away. Edison (talk) 02:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

French thinker: lost name

I'm looking for a French thinker (to use a vague term) of which I remember the following:

• Modern (18th century - 20th century, though before world war II). I am actually quite certain that it's a 19th century one, but not 100%...
• French
• Contributions to political philosophical field of conservatism or early socialism, or catholic politics.
• One part of the name starts with an A (one title, first name, middle name, last name), and the name has some accents, which is probably why my Googling doesn't turn up much.
• Is often compared to another philosopher of the same time whose last name starts with an M.

I read a book on this a while back, but lost it. Lists of philosophers and categories of French people don't seem to help. User:Krator (t c) 22:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Louis Pierre Althusser was a 20th Century French marxist, not sure if he really fits your criteria of conservatism though. 200.127.59.151 (talk) 23:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

18th C. D'Alembert had close ties to the Baron D'Holbach who wrote under the pseudonyme of Mirabeau but they would be more in the atheist field. 200.127.59.151 (talk) 23:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

why we should accept the guy s —Preceding unsigned comment added by Madia usman (talk • contribs) 23:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

18th-19th century, conservative, catholic made me think of Joseph de Maistre for the Mr. M "another philosopher." Drawing a blank on Monsieur A.John Z (talk) 23:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

April 3

Antonin Dolohov

Moved to Entertainment Desk. BrainyBabe (talk) 09:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

yinyang symbol

my question regards the yin yang symbol. i don't think anyone has a proper explanation for the the dark dot in the white sphere. of the cirlce. i do believe the correct symbol does not have the dark dot just the white dot in the dark. of this i am certain. Richard Star Mountain (E-Mail removed for security purposes) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.210.132.132 (talk) 02:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, okay, thanks for telling us what you're certain of. So what's the question? Yin and yang#Taijitu might be of interest. FiggyBee (talk) 04:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

about the Hashsashin...

i wanted to know more information on the techniques, origin, and usage of the martial art used by the Hashsashin. it states that the assassins used a martial art that incorporates strikes and grappling techniques. The information is rather vague. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.232.231.207 (talk) 04:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

What states that? The Assassins weren't particularly crafty, their technique mostly consisted of walking up to someone and stabbing him, and promptly getting caught and executed afterwards. Sometimes they got away in the ensuing panic and confusion; sometimes the sources do not say what happened to them; sometimes they were not acting secretly at all and were just carrying out the wishes of some political leader or other. They have a strange mystique that comes from the idea that they may have been drugged, but what the drug was, if anything, no one knows (it may have been plain old alcohol); and that some of them (but not all of them) lived in impenetrable fortress (Alamut), which turned out to be penetrable after all when the Mongols razed it to the ground. But the image of them in the game Assassin's Creed, if that's what you have in mind, is not accurate. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I see our hashshashin article says "For unarmed combat, the Hashshashin practiced a fighting style called Janna which incorporates striking techniques, grappling and low kicks." Well, my first thought is that "janna" means "conceal" or "hide", which makes sense here. I'll see what else I can find. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Groundhog day quote

I saw this quote from the character Rita in Groundhog Day (film) and wonder where it's really from:
The wretch, concentered all in self;
living shall forfeit fair renown,
and doubly dying shall go down,
to the vile depths from whence he sprung,
unwept, unhonored, and unsung.
Anyone? (If this is the right desk) Julia Rossi (talk) 05:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The Lay of the Last Minstrel by Sir Walter Scott. FiggyBee (talk) 06:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Fast! Thanks figgybee. Julia Rossi (talk) 06:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Tito as dictator

Your article on Tito says that his rule in Yugoslavia had several characteristics of dictatorship 'though it fell short on that common in other communist states.' What does this mean exactly? Was it dictatorship or not? Was Titoism any different from other kinds of communism, other than wearing a nationalist face? Stefan Dusan (talk) 08:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

What makes you suppose that dictatorship is a Boolean condition - that you either are or are not a dictator? Meanwhile I do agree the article could provide more information on the differences between Yugoslavia and other Comecon states. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

FINANCIAL MARKETS

name a few private sector bonds name public sector bonds what are the differences09:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

division of indian states

sir i'd like to know about the history of the formation of indian states.i came to know that after india's independence in 1947,indian states were formed on linguistic basis.plz tell.59.95.68.202 (talk) 10:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Have a look at our articles on States and territories of India, Political integration of India and States Reorganisation Act. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 10:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

obamas speeches

i have been trying to access senator barack obama speeches but i seem not to find them anywhere,can you please assist me with the website adress i will most certainly appreciate davis —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.220.120.202 (talk) 10:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean as text or as audio/video? There are some videos here. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 10:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

obamas speeches

i have been trying to access senator barack obama speeches but i seem not to find them anywhere,can you please assist me with the website adress i will most certainly appreciate davis