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.

August 20

US Presidents and Royal Caricature

How many US presidents have been caricatured as a king or emperor such as Alexander Jackson? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.193.163.81 (talk) 03:52, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify: you probably meant to refer to King Andrew the First —2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 04:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Presidents who assert themselves have not infrequently been caricatured as "tyrants". Lincoln, for one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:59, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would hazard a guess that - since the advent of political cartoons -most presidents have been portrayed that way at least once. Here is one of Teddy Roosevelt. Apologies for the annoying ad on the side. I tried finding one without it but was unsuccessful. MarnetteD|Talk 18:13, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do an image search for "president caricature king". The first few hits include Obama, Jackson, LBJ, and Trump. Eventually they'll all be portrayed with crowns once in a while. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 20:04, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That could depend on their effectiveness, or at least their impact. I looked for that kind of cartoon for the three saps who preceded Lincoln and nothing turned up. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:11, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We have at least one by Thomas Nast of Andrew Johnson in the William H. Seward article.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:53, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notability?

Moved to: talk:Hanna Kim

Medieval year-ends

Geoffrey of Monmouth "appears to have died between 25 December 1154 and 24 December 1155". If the possible dates of death were a month later, would we say "25 January 1154 and 24 January 1155", or would we say "25 January 1155 and 24 January 1156"? I'm aware of the potential for confusion in the early modern period (see Julian calendar#New Year's Day and Old Style and New Style dates#Differences in the start of the year), but I don't know how medieval end-of-year dates are generally treated in the 21st century. I've seen references to George Washington being born in February 1731/32, but I've never seen medieval events with the double year, so I'm unclear whether pre-late-March dates are always treated as being in the new year or the old. Nyttend backup (talk) 13:24, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused about the question; it looks like the article gives a 1-year range (not 1-month range) for the death dates of Geoffrey: Between Christmas of 1154 and Christmas Eve of 1155. Since it's a 1-year gap, we would cross New Years day regardless of when it occurred at that time and place. --Jayron 32 14:28, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Medieval dates are not like George Washington's birth year(s), because there was only the Julian calendar back then (this comes up fairly often on the reference desk, but there's no reason to adjust the dates, unless you're trying to calibrate a time machine). As you mentioned, confusion sometimes arises from the different start date for the year, but in that case, the date is always converted to our modern idea of the year (i.e. if a medieval author says 25 January 1155, we convert that to 25 January 1156, if that person's calendar started in March or whenever). Sometimes a range of dates is given for someone's death because no one ever recorded the date of death, or if they did, it hasn't survived. For Geoffrey of Monmouth, the DNB, the source for the dates in the Wikipedia article, elaborates a little bit: "He is usually held to have died between 25 December 1154 and 24 December 1155 when his presumed successor, Richard, took office (although doubts have been cast upon the date of Richard's episcopate)." I'm not sure what that means specifically, but I assume it must be that there is a document somewhere dated 25 December 1154 in which Geoffrey is mentioned as still living, and then Richard is recorded taking office on 24 December 1155 (if we ignore the doubts about the date), which means Godfrey must have died sometime in between. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:17, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"the date is always converted to our modern idea of the year" Okay, that's what I was wondering. So the ambiguous-year thing only applies in England between 1582 and 1750? Jayron, that example was convenient because if I moved up the dates a month, both of them would have had the ambiguity, were the situation as I imagined; if this were the 1650s, you'd need year clarification on both dates, so I wanted to know if the same were true for the 1150s. Nyttend backup (talk) 16:41, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've got it now. Sorry I was confused. Wikipedia has an article on Dual dating, AFAIK, Britain and its Empire were among the only European nations that had two different adoption dates; that is they moved to January 1 as New Years Day at a different time then when they adopted the Gregorian Calendar. Other nations made the change simultaneously. --Jayron 32 16:46, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But our article says otherwise Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 changed both the year end and to the Gregorian calendar in England and colonies. And notes Scotland had changed to Jan 1 already in 1600. Other countries were often more complex with, for instance, Catholic provinces/principalities switching in the 1580s and Protestant ones around 1700. New Year#Current readoptions of January 1 and Adoption of the Gregorian calendar#Timeline seem to show many European countries that switched New Year's and Julian/Gregorian in different years. Rmhermen (talk) 05:16, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Identifying corruption in tendering process

This is how a particular boss runs a dept where procurement of information technology related service/goods/items/material without enlisting suppliers in a transparent way by website advertisement or newspaper advertisement but by calling limited tender among arbitrary selected vendors.In a South Asian Commonwealth countrys' full government company generating thermal power I think this is corrupt practice.So my question is is this activity corrupt or not corrupt specially when in a public notice of the company published in its website signed by the companys director it reads that material and services will be procured through e tender and interested bidders are directed to buy DSC certificate for participating in etendering. However in a power plant of this company without doing any etender this procurement is taking place through this corrupted limited tendering process.My question is the existing practice is okay or not that is it corrupt or not because all South Asian countries belonging to the Commonwealth have some vigilance rules regulations.The way he is conducting business is corruption or not .This is my question.I don't think that I have asked legal question so please clear my doubt some helpful knowledgable wikipedian.Wrogh456 (talk) 14:07, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an appropriate question for us to answer. Even if we knew the details, which we don't/can't, corruption is a legal charge and we cannot advise people on legal situations. You would need to consult a lawyer, or perhaps some kind of advocacy group. Matt Deres (talk) 14:18, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I not asking how to frame charges i am just asking if the standard precodure has been compromised corrupted and sabotaged or not that the process does seem to point to larger organised thft or corruption racket within the organisation or not not asking for specific charges i just want that you shed light on the fact or my doubt if in a government organisation that is a company generating thermal power in a Commonwealth country of South Asia if this is happening is this corrupt practice and if this practice points to iceberg of corruption where a ring consisting of high officials constitute organised racket to systemetically loot money through cut money because the tendering process becomes noncompetetitive nontransparent and invalid because all commonwealth countries have similar rules in this area.I am not asking for actvism but soliciting for your knowledge to discern if this is widespread corruption or corrupt practice or it is my delusional belief.Wrogh456 (talk) 14:43, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You would need to talk to a lawyer who's an expert in that area of law in the region you're talking about. No one here is qualified to do that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:39, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any states that extend the felony voting rule a little into the past?

Or would they all just let any serial killer on "infinite bail" cast a non-provisional ballot from when absentee voting opens till seconds before their first felony conviction, if before close of absentee voting? (and other blocks like mental health, ID and non-citizen not applying). If the defendant's healthy enough to go in person couldn't they deny an absentee ballot while there's still a possibility of the trial ending early enough to go in person? (in the improbable event of acquittal)

If they really wanted felons to not vote they could make anyone charged with felonies take provisional ballots if there's a chance of conviction and removing their vote before results are final (December?) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:14, 20 August 2018 (UTC) if they're convicted. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your question; if I read it correctly regarding making rules retroactive, generally ex post facto laws are not legal in the U.S., so a law could not retroactively remove a vote once it has been cast. --Jayron 32 16:35, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it ex post facto to have a law that says all persons committing felonies after [future date] can have votes before felony conviction but after what they were convicted of are disqualified if results aren't final yet? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't follow your reasoning here. If their vote was case on November 4, and they were convicted on November 5, then they were NOT a felon on November 4. It was a legal vote on that date. Time machines are still not a thing, yet. --Jayron 32 13:58, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how you could revoke someone's right to vote based on "a chance of conviction." That would be a violation of the presumption of innocence. Be that as it may, every state likely has its own rules about such things. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:57, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, they vote, if they're acquitted it counts, if they're convicted of a felony it isn't counted. If it's too late to remove the vote then it counted. Does anywhere do that? Still has to be a method that isn't significantly more likely for their choice to be disclosed than if they were taken to the booth or whatever they usually use though (probably not practical for high escape risk, unbailable defendants). And of course if he's not convicted before the results are final they can't remove his vote. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, nobody does that. For two seconds, just think of the logistics and hassle involved in facilitating that. Not every random thought that pops into your head requires the services of a reference desk. Matt Deres (talk) 19:23, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The only way I could imagine that coming into play is if an election is very close and a recount and validation is required. Even so, if the guy was not a convicted felon at the time he cast his vote, I don't see how they could take it away from him. But to know for sure, the OP would need to review the election laws for each of the 50 states. Once he's done that, he could report back to us. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At least in my state (Virginia) you can get an absentee ballot if confined in jail but not convicted of a felony. But a ballot once cast is cast, even if the person dies or is convicted of a felony after casting it but before Election Day.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:13, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do I understand correctly that SMW is asking whether any place does not count the vote of someone who is convicted after they vote but before the election day? If so while I agree that it would be helpful if SMW doesn't ask any random thing that pops into their head and I'm not convinced anyone does this mostly because Felony disenfranchisement is relatively rare outside the US and a few other places, especially for those not in prison. But I'm also not convinced the general concept is unthinkable as suggested. To work, it would require a trustworthy and reputable agency to be in charge of elections and some degree of good cooperation between agencies. Having a national ID number combined with these would likely help reduce the apparently questionable way disenfranchisement seems to sometimes be carried out in the US where a large number of can be incorrectly removed by private agencies. But generally any early voting especially postal voting must be checked against some list of voters at some stage and it doesn't seem that surprising if this only happens on election day. (Double envelopes etc can be used if ballot secrecy concerns arise.) For example in NZ, early votes cast are not counted if the person dies before election day [1] [2]. Obviously this assumes the person's death has been reported etc. Votes cast on election day are counted even if the person dies after voting regardless of it's before the end of the voting period. I'm not completely sure how this is implemented but I would suspect their name is annotated on the electoral rolls and when they it comes time to count the early votes they are checked against the roll and it's found that this persons is effectively no longer on the roll. Although NZ does generally enforce ballot secrecy, it is also possible to track votes even those cast in polling places if needed, this is used to remove the votes of those who voted twice for example [3]. (I think this is something that's fairly rare. As with the other things I mentioned, it requires some degree of confidence that whoever is in charge of the elections isn't going to use it to compromise ballot secrecy.) Nil Einne (talk) 09:50, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it requires a speed and organization of government we don't usually see in the US, even if you don't have a rule of legal when cast, legal in law.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:12, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eleonor Ann Ram, later Mrs Archibald Campbell

Which Archibald Campbell is referred to in the title of the above portrait? On the reverse, he is named as "Archibald James Campbell". It was painted in 1837, likely in or near Bath, England. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't she Eleanor, not Eleonor? DuncanHill (talk) 16:39, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem to be "Eleanor". Some more clues here: they were married in 1849 in St George's Hanover Square Church, she died in 1879. Here, however is the announcement of their wedding in The Gentleman's Magazine, saying it was at St Peter's Church, Eaton Square. That announcement tell us he was the "only son of the late Major-General Archibald Campbell C.B. of Inverneil, Arguilshire". That can only be Archibald Campbell (British Army officer, born 1774)~~, who is interred at Westminster Abbey~~. As far as I can tell, we don't have an article about the younger Archibald, and I haven't found anything about him. (He's also not the only son; perhaps that meant only living son. Per this history, the older Archibald had two sons and three daughters.) Hope this helps, › Mortee _talk 18:05, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, the one in Westminster Abbey is Archibald Campbell (British Army officer, born 1739), a different chap entirely. The one I linked to at the end must be a different Archibald also, since he died in 1843, whereas the officer I linked to first died in 1838... Sorry, I'm getting very mixed up between far too many Archibald Campbells now. If no-one else solves it I'll have make a fresh attempt tomorrow. › Mortee _talk 18:16, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The one in Westminster Abbey (1739-1791) had no children. - Nunh-huh 15:26, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, everyone. I've linked to this discussion from the image's page on Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:19, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you interested only in the husband, or in further identifying her? Burke's Landed Gentry says: "Abel Ram, Esq. of Ramsfort, high sheriff of the co. Wexford 1829, m. 19 Dec. 1818, Eleanor-Sarah Knapp, and d. 14 Jan. 1832, leaving an only son, Stephen, now of Ramsfort, and a dau. Eleanor-Anne, m. 1849, to Archibald James Campbell, Esq." So Eleanor's father Abel Ram was the son of Stephen Ram (d. 1821) and Lady Charlotte Stopford, 6th daughter of James, 1st Earl of Courtown. Stephen Ram, Eleanor's grandfather, was MP for Gorey 1789. - Nunh-huh 18:40, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very interested in her too, thank you - though my reason for asking was in case one of the Archibald Campbell articles we had was about her husband, so I could use the picture there - we clearly have no article about her. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:03, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the late medieval period, the heirs of the Earls of Argyll, the hereditary chiefs of Clan Campbell, were alternately called either Archibald (a false Anglicization of Gilleasbaig or Gilleasbuig, after Gilleasbaig of Menstrie, the founder of the clan), or Colin (after Gilleasbaig's son Cailean Mór d. 1296), and thereafter Colin or Archibald were favoured names for any boy with the surname Campbell - I think we have an even bigger list of illustrious Colin Campbells. Alansplodge (talk) 08:45, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone figure out the answer to this question yet?KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Thomas Hawker

Here is another one from the same artist; "Sir Thomas Hawker... wearing staff uniform, his scarlet coat with gold epaulettes, his black collar with gold lace, gold waist-sash, the belt plate with royal cipher VR". Painted 1821. It's not Thomas Hawker. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:16, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't tried so hard with this one, but I assume it's the Thomas Hawker mentioned here, here, here and here, for whom we do not have an article. › Mortee _talk 14:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We do now, albeit a sparse one; Thomas Hawker (British Army officer). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:47, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Marvellous! › Mortee _talk 16:09, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some more snippets to the Hawker article, however there is an error in the image caption. The final text which says "the belt plate with royal cipher VR" cannot be right, the king in 1821 was George IV of the United Kingdom. Victoria didn't accede until 1937. George's monogram looks like this or this. Alansplodge (talk) 17:42, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1837. AnonMoos (talk) 05:11, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh! Alansplodge (talk) 09:11, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 21

Constitutions that prohibit life imprisonment

Are there any constitutions that prohibit life imprisonment, or say that all sentences shall not be longer than X years?—azuki (talk · contribs · email) 03:45, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Life imprisonment has pretty extensive coverage of each nation's views on the matter. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:47, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hanna Akiva

Moved to: talk:Hanna Akiva

Repentant criminals

There is a law in Argentina, called "ley del arrepentido" ("repentant law") that says that someone jailed for taking part in a crime can have some benefits if he testifies about the crime, and his testimony helps to identify or capture other criminals of said crime of a higher rank, or even the mastermind itself. Are there similar laws in other countries? Which names do they have? Cambalachero (talk) 16:00, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Does Turn state's evidence provide an answer, Cambalachero? --ColinFine (talk) 17:17, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that one seems fine. Thank you. Cambalachero (talk) 00:11, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Approvers manya (talk) 04:54, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 22

are educational institutions required to file suspicious activity reports under the Bank Secrecy Act?

If a university bursar accepts tuition payments in cash, would they file an SAR for payment of tuition in cash under 10,000 but above 5,000 in the US? 63.159.208.9 (talk) 07:31, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is a university a financial institution? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:06, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the diver who died in the thai cave rescue

In the recent Thai cave rescue, one diver died [4]. How did this happen? Is scuba diving particularly dangerous? It sounds like, by rights, he must have run out of air in his tank, except that this is surely impossible, with basic precautions. Is it most likely the water pressure that causes this? Or a pre-existing illness? IBE (talk) 10:33, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of air [5]. It looks like he was above ground, not in the water. It's unclear why he wasn't wearing some form of oxygen supply. --Viennese Waltz 10:39, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That says, "Kunan became unconscious while making the return journey to 'chamber three', around 1.5km inside the cave. A diving buddy tried to revive him but was unsuccessful." In other words, he was underwater at the time, between chambers. --76.69.47.228 (talk) 17:19, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on Cave diving. It is very dangerous; see [6] and [7] for example. --Xuxl (talk) 13:19, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reports were that he overexerted himself in an earlier part of the dive, so he used up his oxygen supply too fast. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 20:36, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is scuba diving particularly dangerous? A big yes on that. That's why you need training before attempting it. And diving in confined spaces is more dangerous still. It's easy to forget about your oxygen supply when you're under a lot of stress, as in a difficult dive. And as noted, getting stressed means you use up your oxygen more quickly! It's an environment we aren't designed for. This is why many experts were worried about the rescue plan. Fortunately it succeeded, apart from the aforementioned tragic death, which must be attributed to the divers' extreme skill and courage. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 06:42, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On the first caving course I went on, the instructor solemnly told us that all cave divers have long hair so that you can't see where they've had their brains removed. Caving is dangerous, if pushed to extremes. Scuba diving is dangerous. Scuba diving in a cave is very dangerous. Alansplodge (talk) 08:11, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the interesting replies, to all. @76.69.47.228:: why do you say he was underwater? The diagram in Viennese Waltz's article showed that there was air in the chamber. This also sounds more plausible than simply running out of air in someone's tank, which (one would think) merely requires checking the air levels, plus general competence as a scuba diver. IBE (talk) 15:05, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IBE, see Thai PBS - Retired SEAL member dies in Tham Luang rescue operation: "He left the third chamber at 8.37pm. After delivering the air tanks to the T-junction and while returning to the third chamber, he became unconscious while under water. His diving mates performed a cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on him but he remained unconscious. Saman was brought to the third chamber where he underwent another round of first-aid treatment but the attempt to save his life was not successful. He was pronounced dead at about 1 am on Friday". This is the reference used in our Tham Luang cave rescue article. Alansplodge (talk) 18:09, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, same as the original article I linked, but somehow I just missed that ;(. So he was underwater, was he wearing scuba gear? Sounds like a dumb question, but VW says "It's unclear why he wasn't wearing some form of oxygen supply". So I'm not totally clear on that, for he could have been swimming unaided through a small underwater section of the cave (perhaps through machismo). I'll call that unlikely just for the moment. So then it sounds like he simply ran out of air in his tanks. Is this not rather strange? IBE (talk) 19:57, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as I understand it, he just had too little in his own tank [8].Yes, perhaps a bit strange, as he was so experienced. But in emergency situations like that volunteers will tend to push themselves more and take greater risks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:21, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

However, bear in mind that all of these reports were published directly after the event. Presumably there will be an inquest - there is more than one cause of unconsciousness. Alansplodge (talk) 22:30, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what the procedure is in Thailand, but I imagine most of the evidence at an inquest would come from the fellow diver who was with Kunan and who tried to revive him. I suspect he will have known what to look for and may well have checked Kunan's cylinder. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:18, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That and the autopsy. Alansplodge (talk) 17:11, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If there was or is one? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:28, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sovereign bolivar

I noticed that the obverses of the Sovereign Bolivar banknotes are oriented (flipped) vertically rather than horizontally. Is this the only modern currency with such flipping? Thanks. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 13:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See Banknote#Vertical orientation for more examples. --Jayron 32 13:20, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If only the Venezuelan economy could be flipped so easily. One million percent inflation doesn't sound like much fun. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:26, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's an interesting way that Brazil handled a similar financial crisis 25 years ago by using a virtual currency to curb runaway inflation; it would be interesting to see it applied in Venezuela and Zimbabwe and other places with similar problems. See Plano Real and Unidade real de valor. --Jayron 32 13:31, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting. Perhaps the majority of Venezuelans will just flee across the border to Brazil instead? Not sure how close Venezuela is getting to Hyperinflation in the Weimar Republic, but I'm surprised it's not been given an WP:ITN nomination yet. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:37, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It has. HiLo48 (talk) 10:04, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, it lasted three days. Will the currency last much longer? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:25, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Descriptor?

I'm finding the collective term for color, shape, size, and genre. I was thinking of 'descriptor'. What do you think and is there's more precise term to describe the all four? Planet Star 22:44, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd go with "property". › Mortee _talk 22:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Or possibly "classification". It might help if you explained the context - where are you going to be using whatever word you find? › Mortee _talk 01:11, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PlanetStar, can you specify what you mean by genre in this context? It seems to me to sit oddly with the other three parameters.

If 'movement' were to be substituted for 'genre', a possible answer would be 'jizz', a term used by birdwatchers to describe the impression given by the overall combination of these factors, which may enable an experienced birdwatcher to identify the species of a glimpsed bird when no single defining characteristic has been clearly seen. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.212.99.189 (talk) 23:06, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking film genre, music genre --Planet Star 23:57, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What shapes do films and music have? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:41, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you write "I'm finding the collective term for color, shape, size, and genre." Do you mean you are "looking for" the collective term for color, shape, size, and genre? Why do you say that you are "finding" it? Or is this a use of "finding" that I am not aware of? Does "finding" mean "seeking"? I don't think there is a term covering "color, shape, size, and genre". Loosely, you could refer to all of these aspects of an entity as "values", (or "properties", as suggested above by User:Mortee). But you would have to make clear that your usage of "values" refers to "color, shape, size, and genre." Bus stop (talk) 12:38, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Attribute. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:46, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go with that. Planet Star 02:56, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 23

Hitler 's abilities as a strategic military commander

Do we have an article about this? Any ideas about reliable articles on the subject I can read online? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 12:12, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler as Military Commander by John Strawson, is available cheaply on Amazon (hardback used from £0.01 apparently). Hitler: Military Commander by Rupert Matthews has a lengthy preview on Google Books. I also found this thesis: A MILITARY LEADERSHIP ANALYSIS OF ADOLF HITLER . Alansplodge (talk) 12:45, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The famous military historian John Keegan wrote an interesting book "The Mask of Command", comparing Alexander the Great, the Duke of Wellington, Ulysses S. Grant, and Adolf Hitler. Hitler was looking pretty good early in the war (down to mid-1940), when most of his invasions encountered relatively little resistance. When his military forces encountered fiercer opposition, Hitler didn't do as well... AnonMoos (talk) 13:25, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Really interesting thanks. Our article on Battle of Kursk, which is what led me to the question, is quite damning about Hitler's interference, comparing it unfavourably with Stalin leaving things to his generals. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:13, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This paper (p. 30) quotes General Hans Speidel: "[Hitler] had a certain instinct for operational problems, but lacked the thorough training [which] enables a [commander] to accept considerable risk in an operation, because he knows he can master [it]". Alansplodge (talk) 15:15, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Surely Hitler's First Big Mistake (of a series) was mid-1940, precisely when there was little resistance: the Fuhrer Halt which made Dunkirk possible. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:32, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although that was atypical of Hitler, since he seems to have been following the advice of his commanders (albeit not the ones who were actually on the battlefield). The exact decision process is still debated, but it seems to have been initiated by Gerd von Rundstedt, who was concerned that Army Group A's armour would become depleted due to lake of maintenance and that their over-extended lines-of-communication were vulnerable to Allied counterattack. Cassel and Hazebrouck 1940: France and Flanders Campaign (pp. 26-27) by Jerry Murland calls the decision "realistic". Alansplodge (talk) 17:46, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"[Hitler] had a certain instinct for operational problems, but lacked the thorough training" Not much of a surprise. He was a mere Gefreiter in World War I and had no experience in leading operations. But he was placed in charge of the field marshals and generals in World War II. Not a recipe for success. Dimadick (talk) 18:12, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Hitler is a jumped-up Bohemian corporal" according to Paul von Hindenburg. The success in the Battle of France led Hitler to believe that he was a military genius, when his actual role had only been to back the right horse, Heinz Guderian against the wishes of his more traditionally-minded high command. The outcome of the Fuhrer Halt Order may have convinced him that listening to sound professional advice was a bad idea and that he should trust his own intuition. Alansplodge (talk) 09:30, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The second para of Adolf Hitler#Leadership style provides a summary of recent views on the topic, along with references. Recent works in this field are much better than older ones given that the historiography has changed considerably over the last 20 years (with modern historians now dismissing the post-war claims of German generals that Hitler was to blame for all Germany's defeats while they were blameless and powerless). As I understand it, the general view of modern historians is that while Hitler was doomed to defeat because he could never achieve his war aims (the conquest of Europe and genocidal extermination of much of its population), his performance as a military commander was uneven across the war. The generals now get lashings of criticism for their part in Germany's defeat as well. Nick-D (talk) 07:06, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What if Turnbull refused to hold a spill?

Dear All,

I, a Brit, have been getting news reports lately of the Australian Liberal Party's latest leadership battles. As I understand it the PM, Malcolm Turnbull, is under pressure from internal rivals. According to Wikipedia pages on previous leadership elections (or 'spills', which is definitely a cooler name for them) the rules are as follows:

1. Any Liberal MP/Senator can propose a spill, any other member can second it*;

2. The PM/Party Leader must then hold a meeting to discuss the spill;

3. If they feel there is sufficient support for the spill at the meeting then they hold a vote;

4. If they win the vote they stay, if not there is a leadership election to replace them (which they can run in).

(I'm not clear exactly when the seconding happens, it may be at the meeting).

My question is this: Have I misunderstood the rules? And if not, does this not allow a leader to simply refuse to allow a leadership vote (by exercising their judgement at point #3)? If this is possible, has it ever been tried and what mechanism exists to overcome it?

Sorry if I've missed something obvious, as mentioned above I'm not familiar with Aussie politics. 165.225.88.86 (talk) 12:52, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect this would be more a matter of internal party rules rather than anything constitutional. Australia's Labor Party went through similar leadership dramas a decade ago, finally realised the political damage they had caused, and subsequently changed its rules to make leadership challenges more difficult. Sorry, don't know the details. It's a good question though. HiLo48 (talk) 00:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See 1975 Australian constitutional crisis when Prime Minister Gough Whitlam refused to hold an election. While that is not the same set of circumstances as the current case, it does show the power that the Governor General wields in being able to remove a Prime Minister, and is probably the most notable example of the checks and balances built into the Westminster style of government. Akld guy (talk) 02:49, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't seem to me anything like that is necessary. First let's remember in the 1975 case, the government had not lost an explicit motion of no confidence in the house of representatives. They were just unable to get their budget passed in the Senate. Whitlam felt calling a half senate election to try and break the deadlock was an acceptable course of action, Kerr felt it was not. The situation likely to arise in this case would seem to be different. If the leader refuses to resign and their MPs want them out, they always have the option of supporting an explicit Motion of no confidence#Australia which is after all the classic way to get rid of a PM in most Westminster style governments. Assuming the party have a more than one seat majority and all their MPs want this, it's not really something the PM has any real ability to block. Well okay I'm not an expert on how motions come up in the Australian house but I assume it's the speaker not the PM which control them. In this case, since the party doesn't have a majority theoretically the PM could hang around despite everyone else in their party not wanting them but realistically if it did happen Labor at a minimum would support it like they did with the one a few days ago. Of course what happens after may get a little complicated and where the Governor General's reserve power could come in to play. The PM could try and dissolve the house and call for an early election (actually whether before or after they lose the no confidence motion). The Governor General, if they are aware that the only reason it came to this is because the PM was refusing to resign even though their whole party wanted them gone, may refuse to do so and instead invite whoever will be able to command the confidence of the house to form a new government. If the Liberals really have nothing in their party to force out a leader who refuses to resign, the MPs (and Senators) have the option of resigning from the party. Australia has no legislation preventing party switching#Australia AFAIK. Now these MPs would need to secure the support of the Nationals and the others willing to support the Coalition government so it's complicated although there's always a risk that the later could decide 'screw this, let's just have an election' or 'Labor would be better than this shit' anyway even if it happens entirely within the normal Liberal process. Nil Einne (talk) 05:06, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I missed that you were only using the 1975 case as an example of the checks and balances so the initial part of my response doesn't address what you said so well. But my wider point is similar to HiLo48's namely that this internal party stuff is in many ways an aside to the Westminster system especially in countries without MMP or something that makes a clearer link between a party and the voter. While it's developed as a key part in the modern era, people are still voting for specific MPs and the stuff in parliament (and that the government does) is what matters. The internal party stuff is generally largely constitutionally irrelevant. If the MPs aren't happy with how their party rules handle the selection of leaders, they can simply resign and in many ways this isn't so much a 'check and balance' but more that having parties isn't an explicit requirement. Forcing out an unwanted PM is a 'check and balance' although on of the most basic one. And practically, ignoring party requests are one thing; ignoring that you're going to lose (or have lost) a motion of no confidence is another. Nil Einne (talk) 05:35, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One part of the OPs question was, "...does this not allow a leader to simply refuse to allow a leadership vote (by exercising their judgement at point #3)? If this is possible, has it ever been tried and what mechanism exists to overcome it?"

My answer was intended to convey, that, yes it has been tried, and the mechanism to overcome it was the power of the governor general to remove the prime minister. I'm not suggesting for one moment that the current situation will degenerate to that level of intervention, but the power to remove still exists if it's ever necessary. Akld guy (talk) 05:59, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But as I understand it, Whitlam was refusing to hold a general election rather than an internal party vote, the latter being beyond the purview of the Governor General. Alansplodge (talk) 12:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The end result of such an unresolved breach in the party room would be the loss of a no-confidence vote. If the prime minister let things go to such an extreme, I suspect the Governor-General is going to let an election decide things, and if the Liberals do not have their leadership in order, it would be their own responsibility.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:05, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But the OP asked what would happen if the prime minister refused to allow an election. Scroll up to where he/she said "My question is this:" and read what they then said. We should stick to answering question(s) as posed. Akld guy (talk) 21:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't read it the same way you do. I read it as relating to spills.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:20, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And if the PM refused to allow a spill? What happens, as asked by the OP? Wouldn't the government become paralysed by internal conflict, with the only option being dismissal by the governor general? Akld guy (talk) 01:19, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it would seem likely the government would become paralysed by internal conflict. There could be many paths from there. The party could split. That's been suggested as a possibility in the Australian situation, and things are not over yet. A party split could lead to a motion of no-confidence in the Prime Minister in the House. This might pass or fail. Many possibilities..... HiLo48 (talk) 01:45, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For-profit hospitals and abortion: Are the big hospital companies abortion providers?

Companies like Hospital Corporation of America and Community Health Systems own many hospitals of various sizes, and I was wondering, how would one know if these companies own facilities that perform abortions without spending hours researching the issue? What percentage of these companies profit likely comes from such procedures? 66.192.139.114 (talk) 14:04, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The OP's IP address 66.192.139.114 is registered to Hospital Corporation of America, an American for-profit manager of 177 hospitals and 119 free-standing surgery centers in the United States and United Kingdom. In the USA, Planned Parenthood (PPFA) is the largest single provider of reproductive health services, including abortion. In their 2014 Annual Report, PPFA reported seeing over 2.5 million patients in over 4 million clinical visits and performing a total of nearly 9.5 million discrete services including 324,000 abortions. Its combined annual revenue is US$1.3 billion (including approximately US$530 million in government funding such as Medicaid reimbursements). One can seek further information at the PPFA website that provides downloadable financial reports. DroneB (talk) 19:17, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The first hit of an obvious google search[9] was a worldnetdaily article saying HCA did abortions in 2002 and there was a controversy about Bill Frist's financial involvement at that time.[10] I leave RS evaluation and further google searches to you, but this doesn't seem hard. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 06:14, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 24

Pre-decimal British currency denominations abbrev.

They were named after old roman currency at least in the abbreviations. How come? Was there a continuity there or did some fan of Ancient Rome start the practice? Temerarius (talk) 01:31, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Continuity, see £sd.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:39, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, somehow I’ve never found that page. Although it doesn’t exactly speak for continuity. And it contradicts itself on a matter of pronunciation. Surely it’s happeny rather than hay-penny? Temerarius (talk) 03:36, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've only ever heard hay-penny, but of course that's only anecdotal. › Mortee _talk 04:23, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Edit Conflict] As an actual coin they seem to have been (re-?)introduced around 1100, but before then pennies (whatever they were called) were literally cut in half or quarters to provide smaller change, and those halves were, surely, referred to by the same name.

According to the actual History of the halfpenny article it was pronounced "/ˈheɪpəni/ HAY-pə-nee" (I'm not seeing "hay-penny" anywhere). Without resorting to IPA, which I'm not fluent with and you may not be either, the best representation this elderly Brit (who of course used them from around 1960) can suggest is "HAIYP-knee" (with the "H" being dropped in many registers).

The name "penny" (from Old English "peni") is of course Germanic and has close cognates in other Germanic languages. It seems likely that the continuity of the abbreviation (and possibly the actual name) "d" for "denarius", plus of course "L" and "s", would have been preserved by those literate/numerate in Latin, who continued to be a presence in Great Britain after the supposed "departure of the Romans in 410", which was a great deal more complicated and less complete that popularised history suggests. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.162.183 (talk) 04:49, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The northern pronunciation was often shortened to two syllables /ˈheɪpnɪ/, like HAIYP-knee but with a shorter vowel at the end. Dbfirs 06:04, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's the pronunciation I know too (southern England here) – either two or three syllables, just as you say, but if it's three it's definitely a schwa for the e (hay-puh-nee, not hay-penn-ee). (My earlier comment was only about the first syllable, which is "hay" not "hap") › Mortee _talk 11:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very old joke - a gorilla walks into a shop to buy a newspaper - he puts a pile of change on the counter - the shopkeeper says "that's not enough - you still owe me a penny" - the gorilla says "I haven't got a penny - but I have got two ape knees" (geddit ?) Gandalf61 (talk) 08:38, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The usual spelling of the abbreviated form of halfpenny was ha'penny, as in "If you haven't got a penny, a ha'penny will do". The other contraction used was for a a quantity equal in value to a halfpenny, a halfpenny worth or ha'p'orth. By my day, again from the early 1960's, you couldn't by much for a ha'penny, and it was only used as a jocular insult; "you daft ha'p'orth". I do remember my mother ordering "six penn'orth of chips" in the chip shop, i,e, 6d worth of chips. Alansplodge (talk) 09:08, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd forgotten that songs. Thanks for the reminder! › Mortee _talk 11:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to inflation, things are different these days. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:51, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Denarius inflation: 33 AD: ~43,450 seconds of hard labor. 2018: 1.9 seconds of sedentary minimum wage. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:31, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinning down the early use of the "d" abbreviation has proved tricky. Mind the Pennies …: Money and its Use in Early Medieval Europe says: "Monasteries and aristocratic households provided anchors of wealth and demand which stimulated a more broadly based core of monetary exchanges". Both these institutions would have kept their financial records in Latin - "Rentals and accounts from landed estates are rare in English before the beginning of the sixteenth century" according to Languages used in medieval documents. Alansplodge (talk) 12:25, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Manafort pardon

There is much talk in the air about a possible pardon by President Trump for Paul Manafort, who was convicted on Tuesday on eight felony counts. A second trial is scheduled for next month on several additional charges. Suppose Mr. Trump pardoned him, say, tomorrow, for his current crimes. Would he still have to go to trial again and, if convicted, be pardoned again? --Halcatalyst (talk) 14:07, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That would depend on how it's worded. He could try to use the Ford "pre-emptive" pardon of Nixon, who had not been charged with a crime. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:44, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One important caveat about a pardon: Accepting a pardon is tantamount to a guilty plea. In order to accept a pardon, you have to admit you are guilty of the crime you are being pardoned for. Also, a presidential pardon only applies to criminal penalties for a crime, it does not prevent (and can even exacerbate) civil suits related to the crimes, for example a person who suffered financial damages from Manafort could still sue him for damages, and the pardon itself is evidence that he committed the act which caused the damages. For those reasons, it may not be wise necessarily to accept a pardon before a conviction. In civil cases, the federal government itself can be the plaintiff, so he could still be sued by them. See here, to wit "the president cannot pardon a person for violations of any federal civil laws" --Jayron 32 14:59, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per Federal pardons in the United States, a pardon will not erase or expunge the record of that conviction. Therefore, even if a person is granted a pardon, they must still disclose their conviction on any form where such information is required, although they may also disclose the fact that they received a pardon. So based on that, even with a pre-emptive pardon Manafort can be tried, he just wouldn't have to serve his sentence. Nothing really in the article about "pre-emptive" pardons though which seems like an oversight. Regards So Why 15:01, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bit less clear if one does not take "pardon" strictly. Per the same article, the powers of commutation or amnesty do not necessarily require acceptance or impute guilt. In that article, amnesties, the Ford-Nixon pardon and the turkey are pre-emptive.John Z (talk) 19:05, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the Nixon matter, he issued as vague a statement of regret on being pardoned for all federal crimes he might have committed while president, as could be negotiated between his lawyers and Ford's. I am sure that Manafort's lawyers could easily draft a statement that would accept a pardon while admitting nothing useful. And I'm dubious any federal court would sustain an indictment against a presidential pardon that is clearly intended to pardon the conduct in question, whether or not imprisonment is at stake.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The issue in Burdick v. United States was whether Burdick could maintain his privilege against self-incrimination, and therefore refuse to testify, by refusing a pardon. The court said he could. The bit about acceptance of guilt was a bit of a side issue; our article says Legal scholars have questioned whether that portion of Burdick is meaningful or merely dicta.

Since many pardons, at least at the state level, are based on factual innocence (or at least the executive's opinion that factual guilt was not adequately proved), I think it's a bit hard to maintain a consistent view that acceptance of a pardon implies admission of guilt in all cases, even if it suited Ford's conscience to think so. --Trovatore (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rejecting an ambassador

Is there a precedent in history, or any provision in diplomatic law/conventions, of a country rejecting a particular ambassador from a country with which it has otherwise normal diplomatic relations? What happens if the government of Country A says; "We're sorry Country B, we regretfully cannot accept Mr X as your ambassador to us because he (Mr X) is known for having a negative attitude towards our country, please send someone else"? Does such a situation create a huge crisis or is there a mechanism for dealing with the matter without too much fuss? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:55, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See Persona non grata.--William Thweatt ^Talk^Contribs 21:11, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It has happened from time to time. This is why the whole nomination process of ambassadors is kept confidential. Whether to make a fuss or not, depends on the mood of the 2 governments involved. "The appointment of an ambassador is subject to the receiving country accepting the nominated individual, conveyed through an agrément. Under a customary procedure, codified in the Vienna Convention of 1961, the sending state forwards the name and biodata of the ambassador-designate to the receiving state. Usually within several weeks, the latter conveys approval or agrément, after an internal processing that usually includes the formal assent by the head of state. Rejection of a nomination is rare; it may occur if for instance the individual is perceived to have a background that renders him or her exceptionally unfit, from the perspective of the receiving state. This might happen if he is on record with views hostile to that country. Rejections are seldom made public. One US study notes that between 1910 and the late 1970s there have been three cases of failure by US envoys to obtain agrément." ( https://books.google.com/books?id=AEVu5vNbD_4C&pg=PA40 ) Here are some later examples: https://books.google.com/books?id=CiolDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA346 --Soman (talk) 21:16, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Horace Phillips (diplomat) was famously rejected for being Jewish, at a time when the Saudis basically weren't admitting Jews to their country (nor were they admitting blacks, except as hajj pilgrims)... AnonMoos (talk) 02:35, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Other reasons for refusing agrément include the existence of a criminal record, allegations of participation in human rights violations, or simply holding dual nationality. It can also be done just to indicate that there is a serious disagreement between the two countries (i.e. we will not agree to your appointing anyone as ambassador until matter x is resolved). These types of disputes can last for years. --Xuxl (talk) 17:36, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics on European immigration to Algeria

Does anyone know where I can find detailed statistics of European immigration to Algeria? Basically, I am thinking of statistics which show the number of European immigrants into Algeria by either year or decade.

I know that the pied-noir population in Algeria peaked at something like 15% in the early 20th century, but I want to see just how many Europeans immigrated to Algeria at various points in time between 1830 and 1962. Futurist110 (talk) 22:44, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

James McDougall's recent History of Algeria is good on the colonial period; it certainly doesn't have the detailed statistics itself, but if they're available I expect they'd be referenced in his notes. Unfortunately I don't have a copy hand. Henry ^Flower 07:51, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"As of the last census in Algeria, taken on 1 June 1960, there were 1,050,000 non-Muslim civilians (mostly Catholic, but including 130,000 Algerian Jews) in Algeria, 10 percent of the total population". From our Pied-noir article. Alansplodge (talk) 15:43, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"During the French colonial period (1830–1962), Algeria contained a large European population of 1.6 million who constituted 15.2% of the total population in 1962". From our Europeans in Algeria article.

Alansplodge (talk) 15:45, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A little more detail at The Making of Contemporary Algeria, 1830-1987 (p. 53) by Mahfoud Bennoune, which says: "The number of European settlers increased from 7,812 in 1833 to 984,031 in 1954". Alansplodge (talk) 15:53, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Cambridge Survey of World Migration (p. 35) gives:- 1841: 38,000, 1847: 110,000, 1856: 170,000, 1872: 260,000, 1882: 412,000, 1900: 630,000, 1936: 950,000. Alansplodge (talk) 16:06, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all of this information, you guys--especially Alansplodge! Futurist110 (talk) 19:26, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Futurist110, don't ignore immigration of Europeans to the Carthaginian Empire and the Roman client states that followed it. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 13:45, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pictish king

Who was the first Kings of the Picts to convert to Christianity?107.193.163.81 (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Óengus II before 834, see Andrew_the_Apostle#Scotland.
Sleigh (talk) 23:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Probably much earlier than that since the indications are that the upper levels of Pictish society were converted from the 5th through to the 7th centuries, but I'm afraid the name of the first Christian Pictish king will never be known with certainty because of the sparseness of historical sources. See Christianisation of Scotland#Picts. See also our article on Bridei I, king of the Picts in the late 6th century, for some suggestion that he may have been a Christian. --Antiquary (talk) 08:17, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See also Christianity in Medieval Scotland#Early_Christianisation. More detail in The Picts: A History by Tim Clarkson. Alansplodge (talk) 15:03, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful to use only late modern sources; Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 June 22#Supposed early Scottish kings has a discussion about several Scottish histories of Scotland (most of them early modern period) that rest on highly problematic writings by George Buchanan and Hector Boece. Nyttend (talk) 02:19, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 25

Orders from the CofE on the subject of poor M

In Roy Jenkins' Asquith we read a letter from Lord Rosebery to H. H. Asquith in which Roseberry (then the Prime Minister) tells Asquith (Home Secretary) that he "received orders from the C of E on the subject of poor M on Friday afternoon". Why was Arnold Morley (then the Postmaster General) "poor M", and why was the Church of England writing to the PM about him? DuncanHill (talk) 17:15, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps: "This was Arnold Morley [standing for election in Nottingham in 1895], Liberal, whose involvement in a scandal concerning bribery at the previous election had lost him much support". From Economic and Social Change in a MIdland Town: Victorian Nottingham 1815-1900 (p. 222). The Church of England feel it their duty to advise when misbehaving ministers ought to resign, Cecil Parkinson being the last that I can think of. Alansplodge (talk) 17:30, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this 1887 article is the "corruption" referred to above. It seems rather small beer. Alansplodge (talk) 11:56, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 26

Publication date of An Essay on the Nature and Immutability of Truth

When was An Essay on the Nature and Immutability of Truth published? Our article says 1771, and this is cited to the article on James Beattie by Patricia Kitcher in the second edition of The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. However, Frederick Copleston states in the fifth volume of his A History of Philosophy that Beattie's work was published in 1770. Which of these dates is correct? FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 09:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On the title page of the first edition here, you can see the date given as 1770. There were many later editions of course, so maybe Kitcher is referring to one of those (the second was in 1771). Henry ^Flower 10:10, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The edition years don't overlap - the third was 1772, the fifth 1774 and the sixth 1778. 86.131.234.217 (talk) 10:35, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eleve Consul

What is a "eleve consul" [11]? I know what a Consul (representative) is.KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Élève is French for student, so élève-consuls could literally be students, like an intern in modern terms. But they might have more definite powers, more like a vice-consul or a deputy consul. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's correct, Dictionnaire manuel de diplomatie et de droit international public et privé , original edition: 1885. They acted as assistant to a consul under a statute equivalent to internship. --Askedonty (talk) 21:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 27

Weimar republic post-inflationary wages, in currency

Does anyone have a source for the wages in the Weimar Republic after the inflationary crisis? I'm interested in 1929-1933. I've found sources giving them in percentage of adjusted 1918 wages and so on, but I just wanted an idea of what people earned in marks (currency), for context on how expensive quoted prices were. I realize that people earned widely varying amounts; I'm mostly interested in the less-well-off and the unemployed. Apologies is this is obvious and I've somehow missed it. HLHJ (talk) 02:44, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I found this about a general developement of actual wages from 1929 onwards, although without any numbers in currency given. The german Wikipedia also has an article about average wages and gives a number of 2.110 Reichsmark per annum in 1929 for example. 85.16.162.137 (talk) 06:03, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]