Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/H

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.

October 12

Michigan online high schools

Are there any completely free online high schools that meet Michigan's requiremets? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.119.61.7 (talk) 15:15, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A quick google search turned up this: Michigan Virtual High School. I have no idea what the requirements or quality of this program are, but it may give you a start. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Titanic

I have a few questions about the titanic.

1. How could the ship have been considered to be "practically unsinkable" by shipbuilder magazine if the bulkheads didn't seal fully?

2. Why did the funnels buckle so easily, were they really only held up with cables?

3. Which company built the original fore Grand Staircase? Would it have been Harland and Wolff's fitting out section?

Thanks guys, Hadseys —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.192.59 (talk) 21:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did the engineers ever say the ship was unsinkable or was that just the marketing people? The ship was designed to stay afloat with 4 compartments flooded, the collision resulted in 5 compartments flooding, so it sank. Sounds to me like it performed within expected parameters. And did the funnels buckle easily? As I understand it, the boat was at a significant angle before they fell. Once it reached that angle sinking was probably inevitable so there was little point designing the funnels to survive it. I can't help you with the grand staircase, though, sorry! --Tango (talk) 23:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it was any 2 compartments or the 4 front compartments, not any 4. And the reason why at least some people thought that was sufficient was simply that they did not imagine an accident that would open more compartments than that. The worst case (they thought) was a heavy impact between the ship and an obstacle or another ship. If the Titanic hit something head-on, it might bash in not one or two, but as many as three or four compartments at the front; if another ship smashed into the Titanic's side, it might breach as many as two compartments. Nobody considered that a light, glancing collision might open five or more compartments. It was worse than what was thought to be the worst case that could be "practically" expected. Now we know better. --Anonymous, 03:51 UTC, October 13, 2008.

So the mistake was in trying to avoid the iceberg? Had they just kept going they would have survived... oops... --Tango (talk) 11:01, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The main mistake was in proceeding into a known icefield at almost full speed at night. And if they had crashed into the thing head-on, people might have been killed in the collision. But, yes, if the damage was confined to the front of the ship as the designers expected, it is quite possible that it would not have sunk. --Anonymous, 11:40 UTC (Yeep! The time of the collision was 11:40 pm ship's time), October 13, 2008.

The funnels of passenger liners at the time were remarkably tall and were stronger at the bottom than at the top. They were designed to remain upright and not for the eventuality of the vessel moving from a horizontal to a vertical position. (We can notice in passing that one of Titanic's four funnels was a dummy, but it seems to have been less of a dummy than the master, Captain Smith.) Strawless (talk) 12:11, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 13

UK Citizenship

Section title added by User:Grsz11

Hello ,I want to know that how can a international worker obtain Nationality in UK —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.154.11.136 (talk) 02:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the official rules. See also British nationality law. Tevildo (talk) 06:42, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does a 0.5% lowering of interest mean?

The world over, interests have been lowered by 0.5% last week. How much money does that represent? Is that 0.5% of the world's assets? And how much would that be then? A rough guess is one quadrillion euro. So 0.5% would represent an effective injection of 5 trillion euro into the world economy? Note that I barely know what I am talking about. :) Amrad (talk) 06:50, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at Bank base rate, interest rate - it should explain it a little more. The 0.5% drop is not an amount of money of itself, it is a change in the rate payable on borrowing. My (also limited) understanding is that the lowering of the base-rate will help spur back into action the housing-market (such a change will filter through to consumers by way of lower mortgage interest rates), but it will also help because it will make it cheaper for banks to lend money from central-banks (and other banks too?). 194.221.133.226 (talk) 08:47, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ordinary companies need constant lines of credit from banks to go about their usual business (examples: bridge financing and working capital management). In order to do this, banks require lines of credit from other banks in the money market. In times of high risk aversion, it becomes harder for anyone to borrow because banks are unwilling to lend (or only willing to lend at higher (unaffordable) spreads to the base rate - see credit spread) so lowering the base rate lowers the rate that banks borrow from each other and therefore lowers the rate at which banks lend to everyone else. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 09:31, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You missed a step: It lowers the rate central banks lend to banks which, hopefully, will lower the rate banks lend to each other. That last step usually works perfectly and we don't think about it, but in the present climate LIBOR seems almost completely disconnected from base rates. --Tango (talk) 11:03, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Modern use of pirate flag (Jolly Roger)

At summer I saw a ship with a big Jolly Roger pirate flag (and no national flag), at harbor of Turku, Finland. That was very propably a joke, because authorities did not react, but still some people said it is somehow illegal or "bad habit" and authorities should have reacted. My questions are: -Is jolly roger somehow illegal or "bad habit" in Finnish or other nations waters or international waters? How will authorities usually react? -What are you allowed to do if you encounter ship with a pirate flag at international waters? Is such ship under no legal protection? Can you attack such ship? 193.65.112.51 (talk) 10:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our article that you link to describes various militaries using the flag, so it's clearly not absolutely illegal under any international law. There may be some restrictions on its use, but I don't know of any. If you are attacked at sea then you can defend yourself, but I doubt a pre-emptive strike on a ship just for flying the Jolly Roger would be tolerated. --Tango (talk) 11:22, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are still real pirates on the high seas, but alas! nowadays they are too devious to announce themselves to other shipping in the traditional way. If the Jolly Roger is used correctly, in the course of piracy, then flying it should surely be encouraged and not made an offense in itself. On the other hand, if the flag is used incorrectly by non-pirates, then it must be at best irregular. Strawless (talk) 12:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the Jolly Roger is used correctly, in the course of piracy .... Isn't expecting pirates to do anything according to the rules a bit of a contradiction in terms? -- JackofOz (talk) 20:53, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. Algebraist 08:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. That makes no mention of flags, and I don't believe I'm understanding the essence of Strawless's point yet. If it was humour, it's lost on me, sorry. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:19, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't ships supposed to fly a national flag? APL (talk) 22:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alchemical Image Query?

Does anyone have a better copy of the image linked below, as well as a reference (Title/Artist/Publication)? Cheers.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/beyond.gif —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheldon Bartleby (talk • contribs) 11:08, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Anyone" in that case would be Wikipedia itself, see Flammarion woodcut -- Ferkelparade π 12:06, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does the term Neo-Hinduism have any consistant meaning?

I have heard the term Neo-Hinduism used to describe vastly different things, from things like the Ramakrishna Math and ISKCON (which is actually quite conservative) to new-agers who use a few Hindu terms like Karma and Chakra. Is there any recognised definition on this? Wikipedia has articles on

Which makes me wonder should it be Neo-Hinduism, Neo Hinduism, or Neohinduism? I am thinking about writing a stub article but the fact that I can't find out what it means or even how to write it seems to be a bit of an obstacle! -- Q Chris (talk) 13:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that any form of Hinduism or Hindu-influenced religiosity which accepts individual non-Hindu converts is pretty much "neo-Hindu" by definition -- since in traditional Hinduism, such individual conversion of outsiders was basically impossible (the only way that people could usually enter into Hinduism was by whole groups slowly collectively assimilating, and being assigned a caste status, generally near the bottom of the hierarchy). AnonMoos (talk) 15:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

there is Hindu revivalism, which groups all "neo-Hindu" movements, but I don't think it is commonly called "Neo-Hinduism". --dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 21:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 14

Building of the Parthenon

In the wikipedia article on the Parthenon, it says that the Old Parthenon was destroyed in 480 BC by the Persians, and that the Parthenon we know now was built in its place. However, the article says that the new Parthenon began being built in 490 BC, and was finished in 488 BC. Doesn't that mean that the New Parthenon was built before the Old Parthenon was destroyed? Or is it a mistake?72.65.101.51 (talk) 00:41, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I read it as saying that the Old Parthenon was begun circa 490-488 and (maybe) destroyed in 480. —Tamfang (talk) 00:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To the right of the article, beneath the picture of the Parthenon at the top of the page, it says that the New Parthenon was built in 490-488 BC. Could this be just a numerical error by the author? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.65.101.51 (talk) 01:16, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the dates in the infobox. Deor (talk) 10:26, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remedios Varo painting

Does anyone know who owns the Remedios Varo painting Bordando el manto terrestre (Embroidering the Earth's Mantle)? Is it currently on display anywhere? I believe it is part of a triptych, if that helps at all. Thanks. Zagalejo^^^ 01:26, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to this site[1], the painting was in a private collection as of 1997. Artprice has nothing on it even being offered for sale since then. ៛ Bielle (talk) 04:14, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK. Thanks for the reply! Zagalejo^^^ 05:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hal Bevan Petman

Hello, I am looking for information on the British portrait artist Hal Bevan-Petman. I would welcome any input for my research. Some basic stuff is available on a website I started up recently but I require: Photos of the artist,and information on his wife Beryl. Of course, input on portraits around the world would be great! Please look up my website www.halbevanpetman. com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romanokarim (talk • contribs) 01:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for an image: Badge of the House of Windsor

Hi. I've seen the Badge referred to many times (apparently it uses the round tower at Windsor Castle as the main element), but I have not been able to find a visual of it online anywhere. Would anyone here know? [ roux ] [x] was prince of canada 05:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can see it here on one of a 1998 set of UK stamps showing the Queen's Beasts. The round tower badge of Windsor is on the shield borne by the Griffin of Edward III. Strawless (talk) 20:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

British finance rescue

The Briish government is reported to have borrowed £50 billion in order to rescue banks in current crisis.Who has lent them this money,and at what cost?Covkid87 (talk) 10:44, 14 October 2008 (UTC)--Covkid87 (talk) 10:44, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Governments usually finance themselves through government bonds with low interest rate (say 4%). Mr.K. (talk) 11:11, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To expand on that, bonds works like a bank, but in the exact opposite way. A bank is a single lender with multiple customers; with bonds you have a single customer getting its loans from multiple peoples. The government essentially offers promissory notes to anyone who wants to buy them, with the promise that when they mature, they will repay the note plus interest. Private companies can raise cash this way as well. The relative risk of a bond is related to how indebted the issuing organization is relative to its value. For a company, the value of bonds should always be below its real value (this is a gross oversimplification); that is, the company should not owe more than it itself is "worth". If it does, the creditors own the company, and the company goes "bankrupt" (again, an oversimlification). The thing about government bonds is the government is essential worth the entire GDP of the nation. Thus, they are usually very secure investment vehicles because they are perfectly safe; No one expects the government to default on its bond obligations.--Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:05, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Mr K and Jayron32.I have just been trying to understand CDS's. How mindblowingly complicated!Covkid87 (talk) 11:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)CovKid87[reply]

Small correction: no one expects the US government to default. Mr.K. (talk) 13:11, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that would apply to any member of the G7. No one seriously expects the U.K. to default on its bond obligations either. The same, of course, cannot be said for nations in the developing world. They can, and frequently do, go bankrupt. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:26, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, there are certainly more safe governments than just the US. There are some major economies that aren't particularly risk-free, though - Russia, for example. I doubt they've fully regained the trust they lost in 1998. I believe you can get a good idea of how trustworthy investors think countries are based on credit default swaps, although where you get those numbers, I don't know. There are credit ratings, too, of course, but those are at a lower resolution - there's no way to compare the countries that are all rated AAA, or whatever. --Tango (talk) 17:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're interested in the credit ratings, see here, although bare in mind they may well have changed considerably in the last few weeks, so those could be out of date. --Tango (talk) 17:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Credit default swaps

Who was the first to issue them?

If they protected creditors against default, and they were traded at 60 trillion, how high are the credit contracts that they protected? 600 trillions? Mr.K. (talk) 15:42, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that $60 trillion figure is the size of the debt being protected (our article, credit default swap, talks about the total "notional amount" being of that magnitude, and I think in this context, that means the size of debt), the amount of money that actually changes hands because of these swaps will be far less (I've not idea how much it would be). --Tango (talk) 16:06, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then, how high are the credit default swaps? Since it were traded over-the-counter, could it be that it's impossible to calculate how high they are? Mr.K. (talk) 16:13, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You mean what's the market value of all the contracts? I have no idea. There will be estimates out there somewhere, but remember the market value changes constantly as people re-evaluate the credit risks. I'm not sure there's anywhere you can find a real-time total since, as you say, it's all done over-the-counter. --Tango (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And why did people negotiated such huge amounts over-the-counter and not in an exchange? Mr.K. (talk) 16:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because there is no exchange for CDSs. Like any financial instrument they started small and were just done on a case-by-case basis at first and no exchange was needed, they've now grown to the level where an exchange would be quite useful but it's not going to happen naturally. Creating an exchange requires someone to step up and do it - most likely as a result of new legislation introduced to tighten regulation of the finance sector to try and avoid another crisis like the one we have now. --Tango (talk) 17:02, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

World Population by Gender

Hello,
I would like to know what is the ratio of men to women on earth.
Couldn't find that information nowhere. The Good Samaritan (talk) 17:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to the CIA World Factbook, it's estimated at about 101 men for every 100 women. --Alinnisawest,^{Dalek Empress} (extermination requests here) 17:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It varies with age, though - there are more men born than women, but women live longer. Young demographics are male-heavy, older demographics are female-heavy. --Tango (talk) 18:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Economics

In general, most balance sheet entries are mathematically interdependent in some way. For instance, savings and interest on savings are related in that a certificate of deposit will usually have a better rate of interest the higher the deposit required, while income tax rates will match the amount of income. Where can I find a list of such mathematical relationships for all balance sheet entries? -- Taxa (talk) 19:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you clarify your question. For example, the *mathematical* relationship between savings and the interest rate has nothing to do with the size of the deposit. There is an *empirical* relationship, but that is not deterministic. The relationship between income tax rates and income is *statutory*. Wikiant (talk) 20:09, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Think of curves that relate x to y. Think of x as something like household transfer payments and y as something like household taxes. Then ask what relationship does x have to y and draw the curve. -- Taxa (talk) 20:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While those kind of things may be correlated, there isn't going to be a simple mathematical relationship between them. --Tango (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ranges and ratios are good enough. For instance, what is the ratio of imports to exports? Does it vary widely or is there a prescribed ratio? Same with taxes. While corporate tax has an absolute upper limit of 100 percent it has a practical upper limit of 36 percent based on the concept of the Laffer curve (video) that tax revenue would decrease. -- Taxa (talk) 06:28, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They vary widely. Some countries have large trade deficits (ie. many more imports than exports, eg. the US), some countries have large trade surpluses (ie. many more exports than imports, eg. China) and other countries are at all points inbetween. You can come up with mathematical models to estimate these kind of things but if they're going to have widespread applicability there are going to be so many variables so as to make it impractical to use them without a super computer, and even then they won't be very accurate if something exceptional happens. --Tango (talk) 13:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The number of topics over which your question ranges is huge. I suggest you go look at the Statistical Abstract of the United States. You won't find the ratios you seek (which I guarantee you don't all exist in a single document). You will find the raw data to calculate many of the things you've mentioned. Wikiant (talk) 12:15, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WW2: European collaboration with Third Reich Germany/Austria

Which European country had the highest per capita collaboration rate with the Nazis in WW2? - for example, in the form of voluntary SS divisions/legions, participation in persecution of Jews, etc. I have read about Latvia, Lithuania and the Netherlands (were these the worst three?) but would appreciate solid information in the form of per capita statistics & country comparisons if possible/available. Thank you in advance, --AlexSuricata (talk) 23:15, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your chosen indices of collaboration are problematic. Many instances of both helping and / or persecuting Jews have not made it into the historical record for a variety of reasons and one would also face the issue of different levels of national willingness to confront their past after the war. A count of SS or Heer voluntary legions can be misleading because there was a certain amount of mixing of nationalities in these units not to mention the tendency of the Germans to exaggerate the units' size (brigade-sized units called divisions, etc.). Finally, you may wish to think laterally on this issue and not automatically unite Austria with Germany. Seen in that sense, "Austria" may be the answer to your query. --W. B. Wilson (talk) 04:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could also consult on-line sources such as www.worldwar-2.net. This site lists the 1939 population and the casualties of selected nations are given, even when a nation fought for both the Axis and the Allies. This may give an idea of the per capita effort of these nations on behalf of the two warring groups. Of course, caution is always indicated when looking at casualty statistics as they always seem to be tabulated differently. As well, this source does not list Jugoslavija -- of which Croatia was originally a part and which was a reliable ally of the Germans. --W. B. Wilson (talk) 16:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For Wiki articles, look at Resistance during World War II and Collaboration during World War II. --W. B. Wilson (talk) 17:20, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, we may discuss if Austria -and other countries as well - have willingly collaborated. (Unsigned comment)

Should one count Italy? I think it is a bit unfair to the french, the dutch, austrains and all the others easily accused of collaboration, when Mussolini had long sold the italians out wholesale. I am not blaming all italians for Mussolini, but this resistenza reality/myth tends to hide some ugly facts of cozy Italian German relations until the war went bad.--Radh (talk) 22:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The distinction (until Autumn 1943) is that Italy had not been occupied by Germany and so was an active ally of the Germans rather than an occupied nation that had collaborators. Post Autumn 1943 is a different story. A civil war took place in northern Italy. There was an active resistance, but there was also a large number of Italian military and paramilitary units under the control of Mussolini's Saló Republic or the Germans (most of whom were fighting the Partisans). --W. B. Wilson (talk) 03:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have read that at the end of fighting in Berlin, the SS units defending Hitler were of foreign origin. The German SS could surrender and be POWs, but the foreign SS were fearful of being tried for treason, so they fought on. If you Google "Hitler’s Foreign Legion: Waffen SS" you find sites which have a breakdown of SS volunteers from 24 countries or regions, including a small British unit. Netherlands with 50,000 in the 23rd SS Div., 34th SS Div. get the nod for largest number. These sites seem to be blacklisted or spam filtered by Wikipedia for some reason. Edison (talk) 16:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 15

St Paul's Cathedral blueprint

Moved from Village Pump. Gwinva (talk) 01:53, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I find a blueprint of St. Paul's Cathedral (the one in London, England)? Lucas Brown (talk) 18:15, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This [2] comes close, I guess.Leif edling (talk) 06:55, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vincent Van Gogh quote

Moved from Village Pump. Gwinva (talk) 01:53, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am an Italian wikipedia user, and I need help from English mothertongue I need to know the exactitude about this citation from Vincent Van Gogh:

"I always do what I can't do, to learn how it must be done."

I do not have found this in Wikiquote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.15.53.127 (talk) 20:00, 14 October 2008 (UTC) ]][reply]

It is good English. (Of course he probably did not say it in English, so there is no exact English citation.) By the way, auxiliary verbs – like the have in I have found – are negated without do: thus I have not found. —Tamfang (talk) 03:08, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think he is asking what it means, since from the point of view of a non-English speaker it looks kind of nonsensical. I'm not sure how to explain it any more simply than it already is, though. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I try, fail, but learn how exactly not to do it.--Radh (talk) 11:29, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In April 1882, Vincent wrote to his brother Theo, "There are two ways of thinking about painting, how not to do it and how to do it; how to do it — with much drawing and little color; how not to do it — with much color and little drawing." Of course van Gogh, who was working still in watercolors, eventually turned to oils and did it the way not to do it.--Wetman (talk) 12:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Archeology: Mega

Is this discovery serious? Mega. It is weird that we have nothing in wikipedia (that I could find) about it, and they also mention on this web site, in various places, "Psychic Questing", so I am very dubious about their reliability on making a fair assessment of what they find. If any archeologo-phile here has heard about it and knows the real story (as described by many other or reliable sources), please let me know. Thanks in advance! --Lgriot (talk) 05:25, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard about this before, although the amount of Atlantis speculation on the web does make it difficult to find reliable information online. Googling for the names of the discoverers gave me this which reproduces a 2002 article from the Washington Post, so at least the discovery was reported on by the mainstream press. -- Ferkelparade π 08:25, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: I've done a search on scholar.google.com, the results have not been too great...it seems they did discover something in 2001, but it also seems there has not yet been any serious research into the issue (or at least, there are no publications I could find). It might be a sunken city (although that sounds extremely improbable), it might be some freak geological process leading to regular-seeming pyramid-like structures, but in the absence of serious research (or even usable photos of the discoveries) all that is just unfounded speculation. -- Ferkelparade π 11:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the discovery is serious, but it has nothing whatever to do with Atlantis, other lost cities, or indeed anything man-made. The structures they're referring to are natural fractures in the bedrock. Check out Bimini Road. Matt Deres (talk) 16:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that clarifies it. When someone goes and takes pictures, we can make our own assessment, but in the meantime, I will assume it is natural. --Lgriot (talk) 00:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are tons of pictures; check out a few of these. As with conspiracy theories, these fringe thinkers have their thinking backwards; they want there to be evidence for Atlantis, so anything that looks good is accepted and anything that doesn't is ignored. If we saw structures like these on land they would accept the rational explanation (there's no evidence of buildings or any artifacts and there's an obvious geologic explanation), but because it's underwater where Atlantis must be, the fact that there are no artifacts of any kind and a much simpler explanation at hand is carefully ignored. Matt Deres (talk) 13:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

reagan, ronald

what is ronald reagan's middle name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Momojackin (talk • contribs) 05:46, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The answer, my friend, is lurking in Ronald Reagan. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 05:48, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

who is this guy?

i want to know who this is,the guy who went from bar operator to lawyer,supporter of Made In America,once shot a politician,chosen as speaker of the house on the first day of his session. pleas help me.thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.199.213.67 (talk) 10:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this [3] is where you (or whoever asked you the question) got it. The answer is Henry Clay (as per the given link).Leif edling (talk) 11:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Origins of a phrase: "Like ships in the night"

While wondering the origins of a Finnish proverb Kuin laivat yössä at the local reference desk, I was informed it was a liteal translation from the English "Like ships in the night", taken from Henry Wadsworth Longfellow's Tales of a Wayside Inn:

"Ships that pass in the night, and speak each other in passing, /

Only a signal shown and a distant voice in the darkness; /

So on the ocean of life we pass and speak one another, /

Only a look and a voice, then darkness again and a silence."

But although very good to know, that only actually answered a part of my question. What I'm still trying to find out is by who, when or where this prhrase was introduced to common language (or do you English-speakers even use it)? Any ideas? --Albval (talk) 11:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poets are poets because they make stuff up, poesis in Hellenised Latin. Longfellow's image passed imnto cultural literacy: The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, 3rd ed. 2002, credits him: "Often said of people who meet for a brief but intense moment and then part, never to see each other again". The signal at night was with a lantern provided with a Fresnel lens.--Wetman (talk) 12:16, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you for the link above. Seems that I'm still a bit ignorant about the cultural literacy bit in general (although I now know probably all I need to know about lenses of short focal length): Is the question about who or where a certain quote is introduced into common use even possible to answer in this kind of case? I'm sure Longfellow himself didn't popularize the quote, if you understand what I mean. I guess what I'm also wondering here is whether the "usage history" of proverbs can be traced back or not... --Albval (talk) 12:28, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's an idiom, not a proverb. It is often possible to trace the origin of an idiom by looking at its first appearance in writing, and its later incidence, which is what the quoted work and other dictionaries of idioms have done in attributing it to Longfellow. Someone, somewhere, will have data about how long it took to be commonly used. And yes, it is a common English phrase. Gwinva (talk) 21:43, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's neither an idiom nor a proverb: it's a metaphor. During his lifetime Henry Wadsworth Longfellow was one of the most widely-read, widely-memorised and widely-quoted poets in the United States. I wonder how many editions Tales of a Wayside Inn sold out before World War I. Also in the volume: "Paul Revere's Ride".--Wetman (talk) 00:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't deny it's a metaphor; but it's now used idiomatically. (As our own article states: "Most idioms are a colloquial metaphors".) Gwinva (talk) 00:38, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you for clearing things up for me. As you probably guessed, English is not my mother tongue and therefore selecting the used terms (proverb/idiom/metaphor) comes sometimes to downright guessing... --Albval (talk) 07:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LAND RIGHTS AND THE RIGHT TO VOTE!

I would like to know why the gov't keeps trying to take more land from the Indians and why they CAN'T vote? Were they not here FIRST? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.25.71.77 (talk) 12:42, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about the USA? Because Native Americans in the United States can vote. As for the "take more land bit", I'd need more information than what you've provided (a link to a news story of what you thinking of in particular would help). --98.217.8.46 (talk) 13:16, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see, you're talking about Canada, I imagine (given that your only other edit is to put a question on a photo of Stephen Harper). Weell, I don't know about Canada. This article, though, seems to indicate that legally they can vote, though I don't pretend to understand how this works in Canada. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 13:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Native Canadians can vote, just like any other citizen. It's true that they tend to vote in lower numbers than other groups, but this is not due to any legal restrictions. There were several pieces on the radio in the last few weeks where native leaders were encouraging them to turn out and vote. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Canadian government trying to take their land, as the questioner says? And were the present population of native Canadians the first, or did they replace other earlier populations of different origin? Edison (talk) 15:58, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aboriginal land claims are a highly contentious issue in Canada (and deserves a much better article than the one we have); for the sake of neutrality I'm not going to say much. Some native Canadians would certainly claim that governments (and others) in the past have taken land from them, and are obstructing their attempts to get it back. See also Ipperwash Crisis. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:32, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They can vote but the new laws requiring photo ID makes it more difficult since (at least if they live on a reserve) many of them don't have driver's licenses or whatever other pieces of identification they might need. I was looking at the rules at the polling station yesterday, and they can vote if whoever is in charge of the band or reserve verifies that they actually live there, but maybe no one takes the time to get that verification. (When 40% of the rest of the country doesn't bother to vote, that shouldn't be surprising.) For land claims, see also Caledonia land dispute for another famous one. There are many other claims that don't make the news; I remember reading it would take a century to settle all the current claims, and that is only if no new ones are made. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The other thing of course is that given the FPTP system Canada uses and the fact that they are a relatively small and spreadout population, they probably have little chance of greatly influencing the outcome of the election. Is there any seat with more then say, 20% aboriginal population? Nil Einne (talk) 09:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. For one thing, the entire territory of Nunavut has a very high percentage of Inuit. Within the provinces, many of the northern areas of Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba, etc. have very high concentrations. According to our article on the politics of Saskatchewan, about 10% of that province's entire population is composed of "First Nations" peoples, but that's not evenly distributed. The white populations will be densely settled in the major cities (Saskatoon, Regina, etc. and the percentage of Indians will go up as you go more rural or northerly. Matt Deres (talk) 13:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nature of Opinions (I am not asking for an opinion about something)

Looking at the definition of opinion on Wikipedia seen here:

"An opinion is a person's ideas and thoughts towards something which it is either impossible to verify the truth of, or the truth of which is thought unimportant to the person. It is an assertion about something especially if that something lies in the future and its truth or falsity cannot be directly established e.g. induction. An opinion is not a fact, because opinions are either not falsifiable, or the opinion has not been proven or verified. If it later becomes proven or verified, it is no longer an opinion, but a fact."

1. It makes me realize how much of life is opinionated and you will not pass through life with-out making an opinion. As we are naturely inclined to form judgements, beliefs, values, interpretations, etc. Since they will never be true nor false, why do we as humans try in life because whatever we feel in life is meaningul or beautiful or benevolent and many other things there is no standard rule of universality that gives our belief verification or meaning.

2.For instance, someone may say that abortion is wrong. Though it seems unethical, is there reallly a way to determine if abortion is right or wrong?

3.Another example I have is a "best category" so many organizatioins have competitions like (best picture,oscar competitions, beauty pageants,etcedera. But there is no "true way to evaluate these kinds of things. Also, many people feel that their name is the best name and there is no way to test that out although their name is special since the day they were born.

4. In a larger sense, there is like no true interpretation. For example say you read a book and you think it is well-written, refreshingly candor, and thought provoking; on the other hand- another person thinks it is horrible and tasteless.

I am saying is that there is no quantifiable method to anaylyze and I am wondering what people do when they realize these things in life? Is there truth to judgements, values,etc.? And in what way can we confirm this?

Once again I thank you for your time and I jsut want to know what the right approach would be. Thanks... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.170.45.41 (talk) 19:02, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You sound like you need to read some Philosophy I would recommend starting at http://www.btinternet.com/~glynhughes/squashed/ which is a 'squashed' philosophers resource (it condenses full text into much smaller, quicker to read segments without losing that much of the detail/points raised). There are no universal truths around good/bad. There are no truly universal morals or codes of ethics. Culture and society are all you have. Considering this doesn't mean that you cannot feel your values are worthwhile, or your ideas are true/correct. You are you own mind, what others say should not necessarily impact what you consider to be correct/incorrect. If you believe a painting is good that doesn't mean others must, but then how does another's opinion prove/disprove your thoughts? There may be a branch of thinking around what you mean, it sounds like it could be something to do with life/decisions being futile but not sure what it would be called. ny156uk (talk) 22:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Opinions can be based on better or worse reasoning, better or worse evidence. There are many reasons to "try at life" other than universality. There are lots of other reasons to value life.

2. Ethics is not the same thing as opinion. At some level though it reduces to a few core beliefs which are about shared history, empathy, religious beliefs, shared concepts (like "fairness"), and so forth. There are lots of ways to determine whether something is right or wrong according to a given ethical system. The choice of ethical system, though, is more arbitrary.

3. Awards are about the reification of opinions held by a select group. If you don't care about their opinions, then they mean nothing. If you do care about their opinions, then they mean something. Even things as apparently prestigious as the Nobel Prizes only mean something because people agree they do. (Many scientists think Nobel Prizes are highly overrated, for example.)

4. They are many true interpretations, but you are referring to a specific form of interpretation.

5. Just because something is quantifiable doesn't mean quantifying it gives the best answers; and the fact is that most people recognize that at some level fundamental differences in values mean that certain things are irreconcilable between disagreeing parties, ergo the notion that we "agree to disagree", i.e. we just acknowledge that we're not going to see eye-to-eye. I don't think it has any effect on quality of life in general. I don't think, in general, it even has an affect on how most people live their lives. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 04:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I still feel like so much is meaingless without a system to judge, so it all feels like nothing really matters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.170.45.41 (talk) 21:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly there is a system to judge, but the system is a kind of centre or reference point. In this way, the centre itself is a bias of conditioning and seeing one's position as superior, right or best (eg, see Eurocentrism). If you browse the article Post-structuralism in the section "Destabilised meaning" you find that a cultural centre or cultural reference point is such a system, but it only works if you align with it. Meaning can also be found by taking a critical position, questioning and comparing so that its agenda can be discovered. Philosophy, cultural studies and sociology would keep you busy. No need to give up when critiquing is so much fun. As the Postmodernists might say there are many "centres" and many histories – and I'd add in there, many valid "truths". In this exploration you might come to realise the centre is not such a social/cultural set of truths as a personal set of truths. And the outcome from that is to understand that context is important rather than accepting some vague authoritarian ruling on what is meaningful or important. Julia Rossi (talk) 07:44, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS this is such a beautiful question (imo) it opens up a panorama of thinking. You might also look at Ethics, Applied ethics and applied philosophy[4]... and the Philosophy of perception where the question is "Can we ever know another point of view in the way we know our own?" :) Julia Rossi (talk) 07:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poet Gilbert Maxwell

I am looking for a poem by Gilbert Maxwell. He was born in 1910, and did do some writing for Harpers Magazine. Specifically, I am looking for the entire poem which contains the lines:

                    There are trees that seem to die at the end
                    of autumn. There are also the evergreens.

This quote is found in the Daily Meditation book, Color of Light. I have used it for many years in my nonprofit organization. I am looking for the entire tet but have had no luck at all. 69.40.161.115 (talk) 20:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are several of Maxwell's poems at http://harpers.org/subjects/GilbertMaxwell, but you have to subscribe to Harper's to see the pages. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 19:57, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1920's Marriage Laws

I have been searching both Wikipedia and elsewhere, but I can't find anything on this subject. I'm a writer, and this research is fairly critical (although not time sensitive) to my work. What were the marriage and age of consent laws of the 1920's, specifically in Chicago and Massachusetts? Missouri would be nice too, if you know. Starlingswings (talk) 21:00, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Law libraries in the relevant jurisdictions might be able to help you out. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:07, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the President and Vice -President are dead...

Who takes over as the president if both the president and vice-president are killed? Does anyone know? Starlingswings (talk) 21:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The speaker of the house. See United States presidential line of succession. --Tango (talk) 21:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Darn, Tango, you beat me to it. bibliomaniac 1 5 21:13, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More precisely, the speaker of the house takes over if eligible (as the current one would be). See the article for more on eligibility. Of course, we're talking about the case were the president and VP are killed at the same time, or close enough together that there isn't time for a new VP to be nominated and confirmed in between. If there is a new VP, obviously that person becomes president.

I assume we're talking about the US in all this. Presuambly there are other countries with a president and vice-president, and they will have their own rules! --Anonymous, 21:49 UTC, October 15, 2008.

Generally if someone doesn't think to say what country they're talking about it's safe to assume they're American. The fact that there is a US presidential election coming up reinforces that. --Tango (talk) 22:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the basis that only Americans would assume the world assumes they're American? Gwinva (talk) 22:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How can they forget something that they never learned in the first place? -- kainaw ™ 01:47, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected. --Tango (talk) 15:34, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Either that, or they just forget the rest of the world exists... --Tango (talk) 22:58, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably on the basis that this is the English WP and USA is the only major English-speaking country I can think of that's ruled by a president and not a prime minister. APL (talk) 16:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But that would mean attributing good sense rather than ignorant provincialism to Americans. Not at all in the agenda. - Nunh-huh 19:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But would it not also mean attributing arrogant superiority complex towards all people who aren't Americans, simply on the basis that they aren't Americans? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:04, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't see why it would. - Nunh-huh 21:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just because someone isn't American doesn't mean there isn't something else wrong with them. --Tango (talk) 22:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it good sense to rely on people knowing that the US is the only major English-speaking nation with a president? I think good sense would be to specifically state what you're talking about from the start. Also, both India and Zimbabwe use English a lot and have presidents, there may be others I've missed as well. --Tango (talk) 22:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ireland. Although it doesn't have a vice-president... 80.254.147.52 (talk) 12:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Is it good sense to rely on people knowing that the US..." That's not the question at hand. The issue is that, given that the vast majority of the Internet's native English speakers come from either USA, Canada, Australia or UK, can we assume that a given question about an unnamed "president" is referring to the USA? I think we can make that assumption, by simple logic, No need to hijack the guy's question for ugly nationalism, whether intended as humor or not. (Also providing the correct answer for other nations like Zimbabwe is, of course, a bonus.)APL (talk) 23:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it's a safe assumption for us to make and we've answered the OP's question based on it. We've now gone off-topic (no harm there, since the question is answered) and are discussing (somewhat in jest) whether it is appropriate for the OP to assume that we would assume he's talking about the US. It's not relevant to the OP's question, but it's an interesting point. --Tango (talk) 00:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It also works in reverse. If 2 Americans are talking about politics and government, and one of them refers to "the Queen", it'd be a pretty safe bet he's referring to the Queen of the UK (although if the other person asked which queen he was talking about, he'd probably answer "the Queen of England"). -- JackofOz (talk) 00:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah? Why not assume they're referring to the Queen of Australia? Or the Queen of Canada, for that matter? Hmmmm????? :-) --Anonymous, 22:10 UTC, October 17, 2008.

Because chances are they don't realise those places have a Queen? (I heard about a survey recently that showed a large proportion of Australians don't know Australia has a Queen, so what chance do Americans have?) --Tango (talk) 22:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I take your point, Anonymous. She is queen of all 16 realms, not just of the UK. But when non-realmers talk about her, unless they're specifically discussing Canadian, Jamaican or wherever governance arrangements, they think of her as a British person who reigns in Britain only. Heck, we in Australia generally think of her as a British person, which she is. Many Aussies are not aware of any such office as "Queen of Australia", nor are they aware we even have a constitution, much less know what's in it. Americans are generally even further behind the 8-ball. Any way, my point was that "the Queen" is generally enough to identify Elizabeth II among Americans. They wouldn't assume their interlocutor was speaking about the Queen of Denmark or the Queen of the Netherlands, for example, unless they were talking about those places. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Presidential "Candidate" or "President Elect" Succession

Are there any formal rules such as the United States presidential line of succession to deal with incapacity, death or resignation of the candidate of a major party or perhaps more importantly the President-elect either before or after being chosen by the Electoral College? -hydnjo talk 22:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and it's in our article on the succession. If the President-elect (which I believe means after the Electoral College's decision) dies prior to the inauguration, the Vice-President-elect is inaugurated as President and serves the term. If they died before the Electoral College's decision, then I guess the Electoral College would elect the vice-presidential candidate as president (no idea what they'd do about vice president). --Tango (talk) 22:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tango, I missed that part about the post-Electoral College situation which is clearly addressed in our succession article. I guess prior to the EC vote ("...unofficially the person chosen in the November popular election is called the President-elect even before the Electoral College meets") or even prior to the national vote things could get pretty dicey :( -hydnjo talk 22:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we discussed it on the ref desk a few weeks ago, if memory serves. You may wish to check the archives. --Tango (talk) 22:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's not the President elect until the electors have made him so. There are four separate situations to consider:

[1] death of a presidential candidate before the popular elections
[2] death of a presidential candidate after the popular election and before the electors have voted, and
[3] death of the president elect, after the electors have voted, and before Congress has counted the electoral votes
[4] death of the president elect, after Congress has counted the electoral votes, but before assuming office

For [1], the party simply chooses another candidate according to its rules. Both Democratic and Republican parties have rules to cover this contingency: basically the party's national committee chooses the candidate. In most instances they'd be expected to choose the VP candidate, and name a new VP candidate, but there's no requirement that that happen. [1] has never happened (though a VP candidate did die in 1912 before election, and a VP candidate resigned in 1972 after the nomination and before the election)

The only instance of [2] was the death of Horace Greeley in the 1872 election. He was the loser in the election, and several of his electors voted for him. The congressional joint meeting declined to count his votes, reasoning that a dead man can't be president. So I think we can state on the basis of precedent, a well as good sense, that death of a candidate frees his electors to vote for someone else. Theoretically, the electors of a dead candidate would be free to vote for whomever they please; in all likelihood, the candidate's party would select a new candidate (as in situation [1]) and ask that the electors vote for him, and in all likelihood the electors would do so.

In situation [3], there is some question, but as most people interpret the 12th Amendment, all elector's votes would have to count, even those for a dead candidate, in which instance it's the same as situation [4], and the 12th Amendment would govern: the VP elect would become president, and after assuming office, could appoint a VP under the 25th amendment.

If neither a president nor a vice president qualifies on January 20, then the 20th Amendment governs and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 would make the Speaker of the House, the president pro tempore of the Senate and the various cabinet members, in order, and if qualified, and if they accept, the president. Congress was authorized under the 20th Amendment to pass a law with reference to the death of any of the persons from whom the House might choose a president, or the Senate choose a vice president, but Congress has not done so. - Nunh-huh 22:54, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nunh-huh for your comprehensive response and for addressing even those unlikely scenarios that I forgot about. -hydnjo talk 23:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the interesting - and hopefully hypothetical - question. :) - Nunh-huh 23:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed! :) hydnjo talk 23:32, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 16

Is China's political system robust enough to withstand the global financial crisis

Given that inflation and corruption are endemic in the PRC, how well can they withstand the current financial meltdown (assuming that it gets worse)? On another point, I'm only guessing here, but if a financial crisis, on the same scale as that in the US, were to (somehow) originate from the PRC I believe that it would have a pretty hard time dealing with the problem (compared to the US). Does that sound like a reasonable assertion?

I don't know anything about economics so feel free to take me task with my assumptions.ExitRight (talk) 14:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, since China is largely a worldwide purchaser of government bonds of other countries (they are a creditor nation rather than a debtor nation), and most of the western world is issueing bonds faster than they can print the promissory notes to cover their respective governemnt obligations to "prop-up" the banking industry, China is likely to "make out like a bandit" in the current crisis. As long as the US and UK governments don't go bankrupt in the current crisis, China stands to make a pretty penny on the interest on these bonds. Plus there's always the threat they could "call in the debt" which puts them in a position of considerable power, politically speaking, over the politics and policies of those governments. Scared yet? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 14:10, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fortunately for the debtor nations you can't "call in" a bond. It's a promise to pay at a certain time in the future. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:35, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the closest they can get to calling in the debt is to not roll it over when it matures. Usually when a bond matures you just use the proceeds to buy another bond, if they choose not to do that and to stop buying new bonds entirely then the governments borrowing from China would have to pay more interest on their debt in order to attract other lenders (I'm sure they would still be able to find lenders, it would just be more expensive). --Tango (talk) 15:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that ExitRight is asking how the PRC government might fare if the current financial meltdown spreads to the PRC, rather than how the meltdown now mainly confined to Western countries will affect the PRC government. Of course, we can't know the answer to either question, since we can't predict the future. However, the PRC has a relatively fragile and undeveloped financial system, and it has had a real estate and stock bubble similar to the ones whose bursting is impacting the West. I think that there is a very good chance that the PRC will have its own financial crisis in the fairly near future. At the same time, its economy is somewhat dependent on exports to the West. Recession in the West, coupled with a drying up of credit within the PRC, would be likely to cause a rise in unemployment within the PRC. The PRC government has relied on steady economic advance to legitimize its rule, and an end to that economic advance could cause public dissatisfaction, already evident in many parts of the country, to increase, perhaps dramatically. Public unrest on a large enough scale could pose a serious threat to the Communist government. But we don't know whether unrest would reach that scale, and even if it did, the government might find an effective response. Marco polo (talk) 16:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't China as affected by the financial meltdown as the rest of us, given that the Hang Seng has been subject to the same falls as the Nikkei and other Asian stock markets? Itsmejudith (talk) 22:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to compare how much each country is affected, but China has definitely been affected. I believe they've already reduced growth forecasts. --Tango (talk) 23:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UK Banking problem ... solution

What would have happened if Scotland had gone independent of the rest of UK. As a result of which Bank of Sotland and Royal Bank of Scotland would not have been advanced loans. But National Westminster Bank belongs to RBOS. Kittybrewster ☎ 19:18, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If Scotland had gone independent it would have its own central bank that could have lent them money. The Bank of England or UK Treasury might have lent money to the parts of their businesses in the UK, as well, or at least protected depositor's money. --Tango (talk) 19:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, it's impossible to know, as we'd only be speculating what the fiscal arrangements would be for an independent Scotland. We don't know what regulatory framework Scotland would have, and we don't know to what extent, and in what manner, the central banking and monetary policy structures of Scotland would be disentangled from those of the rump UK. An amicable split would involve a distribution of the community assets (and liabilities) of the UK, and inevitable asymetries between the resulting countries would mean the negotiators of the schism would trade one thing off against another. It's likely Scotland would seek to join the Euro; we can presume (but cannot be sure) that it would either inherit or immediately join EU, EEA, and the panoply of European and international institutions. Secondly, it seems countries are taking responsibility for protecting banks that operate in their own country regardless of the nominal HQ of that bank. So it would seem rump UK would be responsible for banks trading in its economy, Scotland for banks in its (so each country is responsible for the business RBOS or HBOS or XBOS does in its economy). Unless you have banks that attract business from one country while having little actual trading or presence there (like Landsbanki) it's probably mostly a wash. But thirdly, the economies of Scotland and the rest of the UK are so deeply intertwined that, even with a political disunion, neither country could afford the other getting into trouble, and it would be in both countries' interest to help out the other. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:04, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's an interesting question; rather like Iceland, Scotland has big banks for such a small nation: RBS, HBOS, and also Lloyds TSB which is headquartered in Glasgow although largely an English company. It is questionable whether an independent Scotland would have enough money to bail out its banks. Being optimistic, you can look at what happened in Ireland recently where the Irish government guaranteed deposits by some subsidiaries of foreign banks[5] so if Scottish banks failed the English government might well still have intervened to protect English depositors in NatWest, etc - or, as is happening with Iceland[6], the English government might have taken more aggressive moves against Scotland. Who knows?--Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 16:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

President and Vice President nominees

When the nominees for USA President and Vice President are out there, all across the country campaigning, are they protected by the Secret Service? Do they hire their own bodyguards? Both? What is the situation? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:21, 16 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]

They're protected by the Secret Service for 120 days prior to the election. See here. --Tango (talk) 19:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)The USSS certainly protects both Rep and both Dem candidates - but (as with Presidential protection) they're responsible for protecting the key individual - security of overall campaign events is the responsibility of local and state law enforcement and often private security. To what extent notable but very unlikely to succeed candidates like Nader and Barr are USSS protected, I don't know. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 19:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Major" candidates aren't strictly defined, but ABC News notes that "the criteria normally include an announcement of candidacy, prominence, major party affiliation, fundraising and matching funds." Various sources note that Ralph Nader requested, but apparently did not receive, USSS protection in previous election cycles. Going back to past major third party candidates, I find that John B. Anderson apparently had a USSS code name (though I don't see specific note of a detail). It would seem that James Stockdale (Ross Perot's VP candidate in 1992) accepted USSS protection.

It's also worth noting that "120 days" is the minimum. Obama received a USSS detail in May 2007. — Lomn 21:17, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the helpful info and the link. Much appreciated. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:58, 18 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]

What determines the value of money and is there a safety for capitalist economies from the hoarding of wealth by the wealthy?

I have been researching what determines the value of money and havn't found a clear answer. Is it national gold stores, total demand for a nation's money or is it equal to the value of total material capital within a nation? The last idea I believe is correct because if all the material capital in a nation disappeared all the money in a nation would become useless and worthless. If you could enlighten me on this subject or direct me to where I could find an answer I would be eternally grateful and I also think the answer would be a useful addition to the wikipedia internet encyclopedia. I would also like to ask if there is some kind of safety net for national economies as most capitalist economies I believe with the knowledge I have are due to exhaust money supplies with the hoarding of wealth by the wealthy. This has not happened and so I suspect the production of more and more material wealth is sustaining the middle and working classes or nations are producing more and more liquid money sustaining the middle and working classes. If you could clear up this issue I would also be very grateful. 78.152.217.254 (talk) 19:35, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does the article on fiat currency help?--droptone (talk) 19:53, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer: If cash is taken out of the market (by hoarding or whatever), prices fall to match the new lower supply of cash. That's your "safety" for first-order effects, though this is a simplified picture. —Tamfang (talk) 03:27, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 17

Roanoke colony

Why did it take the supply ship so long to return to the Roanoke colony from England? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.4.78.60 (talk) 00:35, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article on the Roanoke Colony has quite a bit on that. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 01:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No one expects the Spanish ... er, well, the Spanish Armada. And the British were expecting it. Rmhermen (talk) 03:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fire Alarm

Some friends and I are disputing:

Is pulling a fire alarm a Federal Offense? I live in the USA. I hope this doesn't fall under the "legal advice" umbrella. We were discussing it but couldn't find any authoritative sources either way.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.188.209 (talk) 02:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might take a look at Federal crime and at the federal criminal code at [7]. Someone who maliciously disrupts the functioning of a federal facility in any way might encounter the displeasure of the law enforcement officials involved. No legal advice here. Edison (talk) 04:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a general rule, no -- pulling a fire alarm is not a federal offense, and depending on locality, may not be a punishable offense at all. This article from the St Petersburg Times notes the city of Clearwater, Florida toughening its false alarm laws and compares the relevant laws of nearby counties and cities. Edison raises an interesting point, though -- causing a false alarm at a federal facility could be a federal offense (no idea whether or not it actually is). — Lomn 13:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the specific nature of an intentional disruption may not be explicitly banned, but that doesn't mean that the act of causing a deliberate act of disruption to a federal building will go unpunished, simply because someone didn't think to write a law against your own quirky way of being a pain in the ass... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, when I once, by chance, videotaped a lunatic pushing over a security magnetometer at the entrance to the U.S. Supreme Court building, I wisely denied having videotaped it. No one ever wrote up a law saying it was a federal crime to videotape someone destroying a security magnetometer at a federal facility, but I felt I would have gotten nicked if I had asserted my Constitutional right to film same incident. Edison (talk) 03:16, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What did John Wesley thought of the French Revolution?

He must have had an opinion on such an important subject?

Thanks

87.116.154.181 (talk) 04:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Methodists opposed it, per [8]. Edison (talk) 04:55, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plato's and Aristotle's schools

I can't remember what their schools were called. I believe Plato's was Academia, or something with the word "academic" present, while Aristotle's was an "l" word, I think. Does anyone know to what I am referring? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.16.88.147 (talk) 09:22, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, you mean Lyceum. PMajer (talk) 10:24, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And the Platonic Academy. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:45, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prediction in the Social Science

Are there any studies out there about the prediction's precision of social scientists? I am principally interested in economists, but other links are welcome. --Mr.K. (talk) 12:26, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

India Today

I remember that India Today had two articles: one about the stats of Indian couple and sex like for example which couple prefer to be at the top? man or woman? and another about kids acting like big people for example a little girl a manicure in a style that a woman would get. Where are those articles? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.204.74.206 (talk) 16:43, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sueing for Peace

What does it mean to "sue for peace"? I mean, it doesn't mean a nation actually files a lawsuit in a court or something. I'm just curious as to where this phrase comes from. 12.10.248.51 (talk) 17:50, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sue for peace has some information. Tomdobb (talk) 17:53, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant sense of sue is "to make petition for," which is older than the legal usage (and from which that usage developed). Deor (talk) 19:36, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It means "I give up. Please stop hitting me." It is an appeal for more favorable terms than an Unconditional surrender. Edison (talk) 03:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Subsidized Housing

Under what administrations was subsidized housing created and/or modified. What were the circumstances that may have affected these occurrences? While references are made as to years these things were done, I want to know what administrations, etc., were involved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.215.154.234 (talk) 17:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would help if you could be more specific. Are you referring to subsidized housing in the U.S. and if so do you mean on a federal, state or municipal level? At any rate, subsidized housing should give you a start. Tomdobb (talk) 17:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the US Federal level, that would be the Carter, Clinton, and Bush administrations. See Community Reinvestment Act. Wrad (talk) 20:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 18

How long since the Chicago Tribune endorsed a Democratic nominee for President?

The Chicago Tribune just endorsed Barack Obama for President. This is a very unusual move for what many consider to be the conservative newspaper of record in the United States. How long has it been since the Chicago Tribune endorsed a Democratic nominee for President? --Halcatalyst (talk) 02:09, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'm embarrassed. The answer is in the editorial itself: "This endorsement makes some history for the Chicago Tribune. This is the first time the newspaper has endorsed the Democratic Party's nominee for president." --Halcatalyst (talk) 02:21, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And your link to Chicago Tribune also says it with the same source. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am totally gobsmacked . For many, many elections the Chicago Tribune editorial board has criticized Republicans, then seemingly the publisher came down from Olympus each election and dictated that they would endorse the Republican regardless. Apparently new owner Sam Zell departs from the rightwing legacy of previous owner "Col."Robert McCormick , who claimed that Franklin D. Roosevelt was a Communist, and who created a 47 star flag because he did not like Rhode Island. Edison (talk) 03:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Library Records

Alright, I distinctly remember a scene from the film "Seven" where Morgan Freeman mentions that the government red flags certain books in public libraries, so that the reading habits of suspicious people can be recorded. For example, I check out ten books on making bombs, and my name gets redlisted, and my list of books checked out is observed.

Is this actually a system like this in effect anywhere in America? It seems like a gross invasion of privacy to me, but I'm not even sure if it's plausible or a film bending the truth. Wikipedia: be my mythbusters. Kenjibeast (talk) 03:12, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is this a reference to?

I'm reading a very interesting novel, Earth Abides by George R. Stewart. There's a passage in the book that it took me a long time to make heads or tails of—I read it four or five times and the best I could get was that the author was possibly alluding to the character worried that her lover will care if he knows she has African ancestry. Later in the novel this is confirmed. Here's an excerpt from the passage:

"You're just a nice boy," [she said]. "You looked at my hands and said they were nice. You never even noticed the blue in the half-moons." He felt the shock, and he knew that she felt the shock in him. Now everything came together in his mind—brunette complexion, dark liquid eyes, full lips, white teeth, rich voice, accepting temperament.

I thought it was interesting that while right after this passage the author has this not matter to the character at all, the part about "accepting temperament" still betrays to my mind some institutionalized racism on the author's part (the novel came out in 1949). I digress. My question is, what is this about "the blue in the half-moons." If it's an allusion to something that is supposed to tip us about African ancestry, it's over my head.--68.237.2.254 (talk) 04:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

collect data on India's current account balance, capital account balance and forex reserves for the period 2001-2006 and list the major features