Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

January 4

The Indian Rupee Rising

The indian rupee keeps rising against the dollar. Would the Indians have to pay more for things like foods, rent, and airplane tickets in India? 99.245.83.28 (talk) 05:01, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily, but it does mean that it will cost Indians more to import goods, and they will get less money for goods they export to the U.S. This may have an indirect effect on prices in India for some goods, especially those imported from the U.S. But it shouldn't, of itself, cause rent to go up. Of course, economic indicators are all interrelated, so the conditions leading to the rising rupee may also cause price increases you note. Such changes may not be directly caused by the currency situation, but rather both situations are part of the big pot of stew that is the global economy. --Jayron32 05:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm forever getting these things the wrong way round, but shouldn't something that harms exporters help importers? If I buy something in America for $1 worth £1, I'd have to sell it at £1 in Britain to make money; if $1 is now £0.50, I only have to sell it in Britain for £0.50. Does it depend on where the business is based? I imagine that India has large domestic importers, particularly with their restrictions on foreign ownership. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 09:10, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I am never sure if I've got "rising" or "falling" the right way around! That said... yes, in general. Who exactly benefits depends heavily on how the transaction is paid for. If an Indian firm used to sell a Rs. 4500 machine to a US buyer for $100 (the exchange rate one year back), then can sell it for Rs. 5300 now. If they sold to a US middleman in rupees, then they've stayed making Rs. 4500 but the middleman has made a profit of about fifteen dollars (since they have to spend fewer dollars now to buy those rupees). If manufacture price in rupees is fixed, and sale price in dollars is fixed, and you now get more rupees for a dollar, then someone will make a profit in this situation. One complicating factor is that India still has some currency controls, but I don't know how they'd affect this situation.

The immediate effect of changing rates is only going to affect imported goods; this may include some international flights, but is unlikely to include food prices directly, as <10% of India's food imports come from the US. (You can find more than you want to know about Indian imports/export figures here) That said, India is a major net importer of some goods which are usually traded in US dollars - oil & fuel alone represent 30% of Indian imports by value. If these are usually purchased on the global market in dollars, and each rupee now buys fewer dollars, you would indeed expect sharp rises in rupee costs for those goods. Shimgray | talk | 13:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The rupee has actually been falling against the dollar, not rising (about 44 rupees per dollar in August; about 54 rupees per dollar in December). That will make anything imported cost more in terms of rupees. Looie496 (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the value of the rupee has been falling against the dollar (and against nearly all other currencies), so the "number of rupees to the dollar has been rising". Fortunately, everyone seems to have understood that the OP really meant "falling in value". See History of the rupee for values since 1952 when the rupee could buy ten times as many dollars. Dbfirs 08:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Who won?

Hey everyone. Given the results of Iowa's Republican primary tonight, CNN is reporting that the last Republican primary that was this close was a 1936 Alf Landon win in South Dakota. The problem is that our relevant articles on the subject, United States presidential election, 1936 and 1936 Republican National Convention, along with a prominent image, show that Warren Green won.

I think Landon actually won, but the Google's archival newspapers only have snippets of the paywalled sources. Can anyone confirm this so we can correct the articles? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 08:17, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, I found part of the confusion. This source claims Green beat another contender, William Borah, by 257 votes. I believe this is wrong based on a Google snippet of the Chicago Tribune (direct link). Can anyone access that? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 08:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

A New York Times abstract that speaks of Landon vs. Borah in South Dakota is here (sorry, I don't have access to the full text). From snippets in Google Books it looks like Green may have led a slate of delegates who were seen as favorable to Landon. I get the impression that primaries in those days were often more about choosing groups of delegates than voting for a specific candidate.--Cam (talk) 01:58, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay, here is a free link (Telegraph-Herald of Dubuque, Iowa, April 3, 1936, p. 16). A delegate slate "instructed for Borah" was led by Senator Peter Norbeck. Another slate led by Green was "uninstructed" but "widely advertis[ed]" its support for Landon. Landon "did not wish to sign the necessary endorsement for an instructed group."--Cam (talk) 02:13, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

the Government of Canada as a contractor to the US government

I was reading the list of the Top 100 US Federal Contractors, and noticed that the government of Canada is the 25th largest contractor. Since this is the only government on the list, I got a little curious. What kind of services does the US government by from their Canadian counterpart? /Marxmax (talk) 12:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Some possibilities : Probably mainly security and military issues (such as North American Aerospace Defense Command radars located in northern Canada). Also Saint Lawrence Seaway management is mostly operated by a canadian federal agency, but USA is the main user of it. Dhatier (talk) 15:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Health care services. Americans without one get treated by their amiable Canadian Government. 88.9.109.182 (talk) 01:33, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so... The Mark of the Beast (talk) 05:01, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

No. Health care is a provincial, not a federal responsability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhatier (talk • contribs) 20:50, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

A simple search for 'government of canada us federal contractor' finds [1]. From there the obvious search is 'Canadian Commercial Corporation' which comes across our article and their website and also [2] & [3].

All of these combined suggest it's largely in the area of defence. Notably from our article

The U.S. Federal Acquisition Regulation requires that all American defence-related purchases from Canada valued over $100,000 must be facilitated by the CCC

The Plougshares ref says

Since 1956 the CCC has been responsible for the US-Canada Defence Production Sharing Agreement (DPSA), which has established a kind of free trade in military goods between the two states. US federal regulations require all Pentagon orders in Canada worth more than $100,000 (US) to be placed with the CCC as the prime contractor (CCC 2011).

A search for 'US-Canada Defence Production Sharing Agreement' leads to our article which I linked above which says

The Defence Production Sharing Agreement is a bilateral trade agreement between the United States and Canada that aims to balance the amount of military cross-border buying in order to avoid trade imbalances. Since its signing in 1956, it has led to a number of US companies sending military production to Canada in order to "offset" Canadian purchases of US military equipment

Nil Einne (talk) 07:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Abe Lincoln's haircut

This 19th century gentleman has lost his hat in a tragic accident that also took his young hairdresser's life.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 14:48, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

After reading through articles about Abraham Lincoln, I'm struck by the haphazard, homespun look of his hair - as if he cut it himself. Is there anything written about it? In articles about his health & physical appearance there's no mention, but it did give him a distinctive "look" & I couldn't find any comment or description, so I'm curious now. (By the way, I couldn't find anything about his beard which he grew much later in his career.) Manytexts (talk) 12:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

There's a story that some young girl wrote to him and told him he would be more handsome with a beard. Regarding hair, take a look at any photos of men in that era, and you'll find that oftentimes there was not a lot of attention paid to grooming. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

You might expect that Honest Abe cut his own hair, and did not travel with a personal barber like today's hairboy politicians, but Abe did have a personal valet/barber, William H. Johnson, who even travelled with him when he took the train to give the Gettysburg Address. Google book results list about a half dozen other men who were also said to have been "Lincoln's barber." A famous politician's barber , like Robert E. Lee's barber, gained the opportunity to sell supposed "locks of the great man's hair" to admirers. A lock of Lincoln's hair can sell today for upwards of $1,500. Edison (talk) 14:44, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The Romantic movement dictated that 19th century men's hair should be fashionably unkempt. Think tall, dark, mysterious, wind-whipped hair and clothes - generally ambiguously insane. :D Or maybe they just ran out of whigs.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 14:47, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

He had a genetic disorder, which caused him a physical disfigurement. He tried to hide his disfigurement by disguise, and only showing his best side in a portrait or photo. Perhaps he used his hair to disguise some disfigurement. Plasmic Physics (talk) 00:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

It's not known that he had any genetic disorder; there has been speculation that he suffered from Marfan's syndrome, but there's no consensus that he actually did, and there's been no genetic testing to support or disprove the speculation. I believe that at least recently, it's thought unlikely. - Nunh-huh 01:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, maybe not a genetic disorder, but he certainly had an unusual physique, his face was also somewhat skewed. He had little quirks to hide that fact pretty well. Plasmic Physics (talk) 02:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

So did he have the long unruly hair and wear the stovepipe hat to hide a pointy head, or what? Has anyone reported on the shape of his cranium, as seen when his coffin was opened in the early 20th century, before its final move to the tomb in Illinois? Edison (talk) 05:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

He wore the hat in public to hide his ears, which were positioned, each at a noticeably different height. Plasmic Physics (talk) 06:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks all for your helpful comments – shows how delicate a subject is public appearance, even to coding one's head as a "real man" or not. Especially that. Manytexts (talk) 02:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

pre-1973 local elections in the United Kingdom

I've been creating pages on the 1960-1973 results (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Council_elections_in_Sheffield) in the local elections for Sheffield, but I'm unsure whether they're to go in the Sheffield local elections (ie affixed at the top of the current list spanning from 1973 to date), or whether they're something separate, and whilst be included on the page, should be in a different section given the significant reorganisation. The trouble is I can't find many pre-73 local election results on Wikipedia - beyond London, which has a different setup - to reference. Also what's the accurate way to call these elections? I've been titling them as council elections but I'm starting to think they should be titled municipal elections or something else instead? Thanks. HeadlightMorning (talk) 13:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

You are right that there are not many pages of detailed council election results before the 1973-4 changes, I think in general contributors have used that date as a suitable starting date and there are not many people interested in adding such historical data. Having said that I can see you have created detailed pages for each year. The Sheffield council pre 1974 was a different body of course, and to answer your question I would not think it right to refer to the pre-1974 elections on the Sheffield local elections page which is clearly about the Metropolitan council created in 73/4. You may want to ask for advice at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Politics_of_the_United_Kingdom. Sussexonian (talk) 21:55, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I would say "same page, different section" for Sheffield and those cities/boroughs which were recognisably the same place after 1973 (albeit with somewhat different boundaries and functions). Unlike, say, Kirklees and Sefton where several old boroughs were amalgamated to form one new authority, where a new page would be necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.172.239.226 (talk) 01:33, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Ismieal Muhsin

I am wondering why there aren't any pages in Wikipedia about him, he is a politician? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.68.125.174 (talk) 14:12, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

If he's notable and you have some valid sources, you could write an article. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:18, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

He is apparently the Iraqi ambassador to Indonesia. It is very difficult to find any further information about him from English language sources. Looie496 (talk) 15:25, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

If the name is from Arabic إسماعيل, that would be a rather unusual spelling (see Ismail (name))... AnonMoos (talk) 16:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Note also that the OP geolocates to Indonesia, so I'm pretty sure I have the right guy. The English version of the embassy's web page spells his name Ismieal. Looie496 (talk) 17:12, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes his Arabic name (from this page) is اسماعيل شفيق محسن --Cam (talk) 01:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Hindu Gurungs

Hi,

Gurung people says that about 30% of Gurungs are Hindus but the link given as a source is dead. Are there other sources on the topic? I only found a few webpages which said that Gurungs where Buddhists who borrowed some religious practices form Hinduism, which is not the same as being Hindu. Apokrif (talk) 15:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Apokrif (talk) 15:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I found a mention of Hindu Gurungs on this site (but I can't find where the footnote is): [4] Apokrif (talk) 16:12, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The Internet Archive has preserved that dead link here but I don't know if we can use archived links as citations.--Cam (talk) 01:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Legal successorship - Kingdom of Italy and the Republic of Italy

Inn relation to other states, I've seen a formal document that confirms that any new state will honor the obligations and international treaty obligations of the former. Could anyone point me to such a declaration, or a converse one, in the case of the Kingdom of Italy becoming the Republic of Italy? Thanks, Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 16:57, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Italy voted in the Italian constitutional referendum, 1946 to adopt a new constitution, and the 1947 constitution specifies the basis of Italy's foreign relations. As far as I can see only articles 10 and 11 cover foreign policy, and then in very general terms.[5] The Treaty of Peace with Italy, 1947 established Italy's new international relations in more detail; it should be online somewhere. On the one hand, the new republic would self-evidently be a successor, just as the various iterations of France remained with their many different constitutions, but on the other hand Italy wished to repudiate Mussolini's policies and the documents set out a completely new foreign policy. --Colapeninsula (talk) 22:45, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Book recommendations

I'm looking for books where the main character is in love with a woman he can never have (but not necessarily because he's poor and she's rich or something like that, or because they love each other while their families are at war :P), and keeps on loving her throughout the novel, even though the love is never, or almost never, requited (but it also doesn't necessarily have to be about unrequited love). I loved Great Expectations, but I dislike the idea of Love in the Time of Cholera, where the guy sleeps with a lot of women while loving yet another one (just to give you an idea of what I like and dislike). Thanks in advance! 109.97.173.232 (talk) 18:37, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Wuthering Heights and The Hunchback of Notre Dame. The Way We Live Now and Far From the Madding Crowd for a major (but not main) character. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:12, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

James Branch Cabell wrote a novel "Domnei" somewhat specifically about the ramifications of this theme. In ancient times, the Aethiopica was somwhat well known. AnonMoos (talk) 23:19, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The Dancers at the End of Time by Michael Moorcock: "a story of Jherek Carnelian, who did not know the meaning of morality, and Mrs. Amelia Underwood, who knew everything about it". --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet, by David Mitchell meets this criteria handily, and is an excellent, fascinating, exciting (recently published) book at that. I'm a big fan of it. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:55, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps The Sorrows of Young Werther by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe? -- 140.142.20.101 (talk) 01:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The Great Gatsby by F Scott Fitzgerald explores similar themes as Dickens of wealth and social class. This is somewhat altered because it is from an American perspective which includes the American Dream. A short story by Fitzgerald called Winter Dreams is similar in this respect as well. There is also the unrequited love of Don Quixote for his Dulcinea. In that book, there is a reference to Pyramus and Thisbe which is the inspiration of quite a few tragic love stories. In the allusions section of that article are mentioned The Count of Monte Cristo, which is probably the most exciting of unrequited loves stories due to the swashbuckling. Edmond Dantes's fiancé Mercedes marries his sworn enemy and later goes into seclusion. Edith Wharton is also mentioned. She wrote a number of books with similar themes. The Age of Innocence won the Pulitzer prize. Like Dickens, Wharton and Fitzgerald wrote about social class extensively among their novels. The concept of social class and station as inhibiting people from getting together is also a theme of courtly love. Classics concerning courtly love will have similar themes but a different perspective. 24.38.31.81 (talk) 15:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Dantes didn't get a Mercedes; he probably had to settle for some Rolls. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The Franklin's Tale by Geoffrey Chaucer and any decent retelling of the King Arthur story. --Dweller (talk) 15:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The obvious: The Hunchback of Notre-Dame. -- Obsidi♠n Soul 15:35, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Not a book, but Cyrano de Bergerac got beaten out by ... a nose. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:40, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Short Story The Sweet, Sad Queen of the Grazing Isles in Pohlstars by Frederik Pohl. Dru of Id (talk) 19:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

That reminds me, The Ship Who Sang by Anne McCaffrey RIP :( is a particularly romantic piece of science fiction, heh.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 14:08, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Indian architecture

Undertaking some semi-extra-curricular studies as part of my Architecture degree, I have an interest in studying old indian architecture, historic buildings in and around India, with a particular interest in how the designers managed to maintain a comfortable temperature, appropriate lighting levels, a good supply of fresh air and other internal environmental conditions without being able to use artificial lights, air conditioning or other mechanical devices. Specfically, I would be most interested in links to information on specific buildings that have addressed these issues.

79.66.109.13 (talk) 22:10, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

How do you define "old"? Blueboar (talk) 15:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Older than air conditioning and electric lights and fans. Perhaps before the 19th century, and not anything designed along British colonial styles, though I guess I would be most interested in pre-Mughul era stuff. 79.66.96.194 (talk) 16:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I found Traditional Indian architecture - The future solar buildings. Alansplodge (talk) 18:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

January 5

Black slavery in Bangladesh

Could it be possible that Bangladesh used to have black slaves during the British Raj? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.155.82 (talk) 01:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm not an expert on this stuff, but by the time there was a British Raj, Britain had outlawed slavery. This article implies that some slavery did persist, but it doesn't say anything about African slavery in particular. Many things are "possible" but it doesn't sound like it was a very common thing under the Raj. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:56, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

From 1698 on, the Omani-Zanzibari Arabs had the largest role in Indian Ocean slave trading, but I don't know of any reason why east Bengal would have been a strong market for them... AnonMoos (talk) 03:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Measure of Science

There is GNP and GDP and other measurements for market values in economics. is there any similar measurements for science and knowledge of a country? Flakture (talk) 07:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The OECD's PISA survey tests high-school students' educational knowledge and skills[6] and includes an assessment of scientific knowledge[7]. The EFA development index measures a nation's education system[8] (The Human Development Index also includes education.) Various people have attempted to measure/estimate average national IQ (see IQ and the Wealth of Nations, IQ and Global Inequality). There are also a lot of polls/surveys conducted internationally to find people's knowledge of various topics. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Education, people's knowledge and skills. how about progress? scientific progress, that at last give somewhere the pivotal role in one field and it's progress.Like NASA's role in space science. I know, it's not about value numbers, actually It's about the outputs. Outputs can say where is the success. We should have some progress measures for, for example if our scientific research funds had the real cost. and something like it. How about progress? Flakture (talk) 12:57, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

There are lots of metrics for measuring science and technology. The search term you want is "science and technology indicators". They include things like number of people with various types of degrees, number of patents files, amount of public and private capital put into science, amount of revenue generated by science for the private sector, etc. It's fairly mind-numbing and like all metrics, it's not clear which of them are really important and which are artifacts of other things (patents filed, for example, can mean high productivity or it can mean a highly permissive patent system mixed with a highly litigious legal context, or both). The OECD publishes a ton of research on this stuff. This appears to be their latest summary report.

Separately, there is a field known as scientometrics but it's more about citation analysis, I think, than what you're looking for. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

There's always "List of Nobel laureates by country". Just remember to delist the non-scientific prizes. Gabbe (talk) 20:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Though that is a particularly crude method to try and gauge a nation's scientific output, especially given the temporal dimensions of it. (Hans Bethe is listed both as German and American, even though he did his prize work in Germany in the 1930s, but was a nationalized American by the 1960s, when he got the award. How much does that tell us about German science in the 1930s or American science in the 1960s? Not a whole lot as a data point.) --Mr.98 (talk) 02:46, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

yea that's true but when we have for example GNP ,we're not talking about who won and who lost. but actually how was the efforts outcome. country, state, even agency and so on. Flakture (talk) 08:09, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Official status of the Hungarian language between 1849 and 1867

After the Hungarian defeat in 1849, did the Hungarian language have any official status at all in the Kingdom of Hungary until the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867? Calle Widmann (talk) 07:40, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I found Geopolitics in the Danube region: Hungarian reconciliation efforts, 1848-1998 by Ignác Romsics and Béla K. Király which talks about the Hungarian Nationality Resolution of 1849 (p.54), which suggests (if I read it correctly) that all the national languages were to be treated as equal. I have to admit however, that I know next to nothing about Hungarian history and may have got the wrong end of the stick. Alansplodge (talk) 17:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The Nationality Act of 1849 was enacted by Hungary's revolutionary parliament just a month before the defeat of the revolution. It ceased to have any validity after the revolution's defeat. However, before the revolution, in 1844, the Hungarian Diet had declared Hungarian the official language of the kingdom. The power of that Diet to legislate for the kingdom (at the emperor's pleasure) was accepted by the imperial government at the time, and as far as I can tell, this declaration was not revoked after the revolution. So, although the Hungarian Diet was suspended and the country lacked an autonomous government after 1849, Hungarian should have remained the official language within the kingdom. That said, the kingdom lacked an autonomous government, and the official language of the prevailing imperial government was German. So the main official application of Hungarian would have been in municipal governments within the kingdom and perhaps in its courts of law. Marco polo (talk) 18:58, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Not sure about the situation between 1849 and 1867, but in some previous centuries, the official language of the government of Hungary was neither Hungarian nor German, but Latin... AnonMoos (talk) 05:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Michael D. Higgins knee operation in 2004?

Recently-elected Irish President Michael D. Higgins broke his knee in Colombia in 2010, but when he was seeking the Labour Party nomination to contest the Presidency back in September 2004, a contemporary RTÉ news report stated,

"There's been speculation for months about whether Michael D Higgins would run for the Presidency. Today, he told Labour TDs and Senators that he was willing to do so, that his recent knee operation wouldn't prevent him, and that it would be good for the party and for the presidency to have a contest." — Youtube recording

Does anyone know anything about this knee operation in (circa) 2004?

1. Why did he need the operation?
2. Did he acquire a limp as a result of it, or did he only begin to limp in 2010?
3. Was it the same knee that he broke in 2010?
4. [Bonus question] If it was the same knee, have the 2004 operation and the 2010 fracture combined to make him limp so much nowadays?

— O'Dea (talk) 07:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

It seems unlikely, given that nobody had any information when you asked this exact same question twice before. Warofdreams talk 16:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

When the fish does not nibble, the patient angler casts again. — O'Dea (talk) 21:44, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Whatever -- maybe you should face up to the fact that nobody here except you knows or cares anything about the matter. Time to try a different strategy. AnonMoos (talk) 05:10, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't go quite that far. I'd say nobody here knows anything about the matter (and that ought to be apparent by now). It's not a question of not caring; if we had any info, we'd surely care enough to provide it to the OP, because we're here to be of service to the extent we're able to. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 05:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, it seems that no one cares to the extent of being willing to conduct significant research on the matter (as opposed to being slightly interested in reading the results of such research by someone else)... AnonMoos (talk) 06:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Nobody's cared to do so, so far. And maybe nobody will. Probably nobody will. Not all questions get answers, because respondents answer the questions that interest them, and some subjects don't seem to interest many or any people on boards like this. That's just the way it is. But it's a bit rude to invite people to come here and ask whatever questions they like, and then tell them that, not only do we know nothing about the matters they raise, but we don't care either. That last bit is about the most off-putting thing I've seen here - but maybe you intended to put the OP off, which would be an odd attitude for a volunteer to have. Nobody dragooned you into answering questions here, Mr Moos. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Also known as a "knee-jerk reaction". Here's the problem for the OP: Assuming he's googled the subject already, we're unlikely to find anything new through that same process. And unless someone just happens to know about it already, it might well remain unanswered here. But if the OP can pin down a date for that 2004 comment, he might be able to find it in print somewhere, perhaps in a newspaper's archive. Or maybe the subject has a website which will field questions. It really comes down to, "How badly does the OP want to find out?" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:19, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

It could be considered rather rude for O'Dea to mechanically cut-and-paste the same question multiple times. I feel no personal pressure to do any extensive research to answer the question, but I do feel it's rather relevant to point that O'Dea is on the borderline of spamming right now, and future repetitions could push him over the edge. AnonMoos (talk) 12:30, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

When O'Dea asked this question on 20 November and again on 28 November, he got exactly zero responses both times. Nothing at all from anyone. I grant you that those non-responses were in themselves prima facie evidence that nobody knows anything about it. But sometimes, we need someone, just one person, to speak up and say explicitly "Sorry, I know nothing about this". That fills a gap, whereas a complete lack of response leaves the gap unfilled, begging for some answer. Now, he's finally got an answer, but one that says we don't care. Not just that we don't know, but that we don't care. And you're accusing him of rudeness? For daring to pose again a question that not one single person (myself included) bothered to answer the last two times he asked. We tell our children "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again". So I'm giving him 10 out of 10 for persistence, but you seem to see that as a bad thing. What am I missing here? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 12:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

One oft-repeated gripe on the talk page is, "If you don't like a given question, don't answer it." I would broaden that "don't like" to "don't know". In general, everyone saying "I don't know" to every question they don't know the answer to, does not seem productive. However, if a question gets repeated, it's worth pointing out where it was already answered (if it was), or to point out that no one has answered it. To say that "no one here cares" makes unwarranted assumptions about other editors. Maybe a given user doesn't care. But another user might actually care - but just not care enough to do the kind of research needed. I couldn't find anything about it in google as such. But maybe there's a biography page for this guy somewhere that would talk about the 2004 surgery. There's always the meager possibility that someone who hadn't seen the question before might know the answer this time around. But it kind of gets to the point where the OP needs to do his own research. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:11, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

As I said above, it's empirically observable that no one has cared enough to do any significant research on the matter (beyond basic Googling). AnonMoos (talk) 14:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

This article edit from the 13th says something about a "shattered Colombian kneecap".[9] What, pray tell, does that mean? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:24, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah that's awkward wording there. He shattered his kneecap in Colombia in October 2010 [10]. A paywalled Irish Times article about the accident is quoted in a forum post here.--Cam (talk) 13:24, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

This Irish Times snippet indicates two knee replacement operations in June 2004. An Irish Independent article here says the 2004 surgery was on both knees. (Knee replacement often leaves the kneecap intact.)--Cam (talk) 14:01, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Original poster of question here. It is surprising how nasty some responders have been. I certainly have researched this myself online. My thinking in re-posting was that passers by who might know the answers, or who remember the news stories from years ago that are now difficult to locate or are behind paywalls, and who did not see my earlier postings, might see this later one. That is what I meant by "the patient angler casts again". There are people who know a lot of information that is not necessarily easily trackable online. I am one of those who can answer questions from experience, just not this one. My other thoughts are that if you don't like my question, you are contributing nothing by moaning about it, you can simply pass on by and ignore it, and of course it is not spam — spam is another phenomenon entirely — and I have not seen a rule against posing a question again when some time has passed. This reference desk is posited on the assumption that people don't know something and others are here to help. If you are too sour to participate in that generous spirit, I assure you I have no interest in you. Finally, thank you to User:Cam for that snippet about both knees. — O'Dea (talk) 12:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Whatever -- if you have something new or different to ask, then go ahead and ask it, but just mechanically cutting-and-pasting in exactly the same whole long convoluted boilerplate spiel yet again another time is verging on being disruptive, and I really don't care what you think of me for pointing this out. AnonMoos (talk) 14:40, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Fui per desertum super alces sine nomine. — O'Dea (talk) 17:22, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Alvin Goldman (1967) and requirements for knowledge

Hey all. I don't know how many philosophers we have around here, but I'll give it a go. In 1967 Alvin Goldman published a paper entitled "A Causal Theory of Knowledge". About midway through the paper, he describes how a subject S, if he is to qualify as "knowing" a proposition P, must be able to recount details of a causal chain between P and his belief in P. In Goldman's own words:

A correct reconstruction is a necessary condition of knowledge based on inference. To see this, consider the following example. A newspaper reporter observes p and reports it to his newspaper. When printed, however, the story contains a typographical error so that it asserts not-p. When reading the paper, however, S fails to see the word 'not', and takes the paper to have asserted p. Trusting the newspaper, he infers that p is true. Here we have a continuous causal chain leading from p to S's believing p; yet S does not know p [because] his reconstruction of the causal chain is mistaken. But, if he is to know p, his reconstruction must contain no mistakes. Though he need not reconstruct every detail of the causal chain, he must reconstruct all the important links.

Later, however, Goldman describes a different example:

I know now, for example, that Abraham Lincoln was born in 1809. I originally came to know this fact, let us suppose, by reading an encyclopedia article. I believed that this encyclopedia was trustworthy and that its saying Lincoln was born in 1809 must have resulted from the fact that Lincoln was indeed born in 1809... I remember that Lincoln was born in 1809, but [no longer] that this is stated in a certain encyclopedia. I no longer have any pertinent beliefs that highly confirm the proposition that Lincoln was born in 1809. Nevertheless, I know this proposition now.

Is that not merely stating that S ("I") can reconstruct only a very small part of the causal chain ("I remember it" -> "I must have once learnt it from somewhere" -> "I believe it")? In which case, surely this particular S cannot be said to be able to recount "all the important links" in the causal chain? 1967 was a long time ago; I'm sure someone will have already made this objection, but I could really use some hints in pinning it down :) Thanks, - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 10:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a think, but others may want to read Gettier problem for background before answering from their deep intuition and so forth. IBE (talk) 12:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Also: Causal Theory of Knowing. The Gettier problem article discusses the exact issue also. IBE (talk) 13:39, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

On reflection, after reading the relevant bits of those articles, and the paper itself (JSTOR only, sadly), I don't quite think you are correct. Clever, but you should look at p369, where he says that the "appropriate" knowledge-producing causal processes include 1. Perception; 2. Memory; 3. Causal chains, reconstructed by inferences; and 4. All of the above (ie. combinations thereof). I think that means memory is taken to be outside the chain, and is used as a primary datum: I remember Abe Lincoln's birthdate --> previous me is a reliable source --> I can take previous me's word for it. That's what I remember thinking anyway, and it sounded good at the time, IBE (talk) 14:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC) But that was previous me talking, and I just had to fix one of his typos. Don't trust him. IBE (talk) 14:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated. I shall exchange that critique for one based on his usage of memory as a separate criterion for memory. - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 19:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I knew this would be study-related, but it looks like I may have given direct help with someone's homework. Please advise us next time if the paper forms a core part of an essay you are writing. IBE (talk) 02:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

There is a canon which confines a curse to fifty lines

From Hilaire Belloc's Lines to a Don:

There is a Canon which confines

A Rhymed Octosyllabic Curse

If written in Iambic Verse

To fifty lines.

Is there? Or was he bluffing? Marnanel (talk) 13:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't know for sure that there is no such canon, but it would have been characteristic of Belloc to make this up. John M Baker (talk) 14:50, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that passage reeks of poetic sarcasm so strongly I'm surprised it's not a limerick. --Ludwigs2 04:11, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Clarification of the Role of Super Delegates in the Republican Primaries

This paragraph from the article on Superdelegates is a bit unclear to me:

For Republicans, in 2012, there are potentially 3 superdelegates in each state, consisting of the state chairman and two RNC committeemen/women. However, certain states either don't have superdelegates, or they do, but the votes are bound by the results of the state vote. In 2012 there are a total of 132 Republican superdelegates.

Do the Republicans have super delegates with more voting power as the Democrats do? --CGPGrey (talk) 15:40, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

There's a clearer explanation further down the article: "In the Republican Party, as in the Democratic Party, members of the party’s national committee automatically become delegates without being pledged to any candidate. In 2008, there are 123 members of the Republican National Committee among the total of 2,380 delegates to the 2008 Republican National Convention. There are three RNC delegates (the national committeeman, national committeewoman, and state party chair) for each state. Despite this similarity in procedure, the term "superdelegate" is generally used only about Democratic delegates, although there are exceptions."

In other words, the Republicans have delegates who can, by virtue of their position, choose freely who to vote for. However, although they are similar to the Democratic superdelegates (not an official term), these Republicans are rarely called "superdelegates". Warofdreams talk 16:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. --CGPGrey (talk) 16:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Oprah's lucky opportunities

I was reading Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers, in which, as the Wikipedia article states, "he discusses how family, culture, and friendship each play a role in an individual's success, and he constantly asks whether successful people deserve the praise that we give them."

Without luring pedants who will snipe that without hard evidence and notarized deposition from Winfrey herself nobody can say anything about it for sure, and supposing that human beings can reasonably speculate without there being an almost sure chance of being wrong, what unique opportunities happened that were there outside Oprah's locus of control to make happen herself, without which her rise to multimillionaire media mogul status would almost surely not have happened? 69.243.220.115 (talk) 17:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

It could be argued (though I don't have evidence to quote) that Oprah tapped into a vein of opportunities that just happened to exist at the precise same time as she got the contract for her talk show: people needed to see a young black woman talking to other women about issues that mattered to them. Maybe Zeitgeist would explain it better. --TammyMoet (talk) 17:42, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

You can read Oprah Winfrey, which is very detailed. I don't think her success can be explained by unique opportunities, but by a chain of lucky events. There's her earlier life. In her late teens she got jobs in radio and then television in Tennessee: for a teenager to get breaks like this there must be a large amount of luck and being in the right place at the right time, as well as talent and confidence. Her childhood was a mix of horror and disaster but also supportive childraising from her grandmother. Winfrey seems to have been very precocious, learning to read at an early age and having a talent for memorization, which doubtless led to her her success in her high school speech team, which in turn helped her in broadcasting. She was also an attractive teenager, winning friends and a beauty pageant, and looks depend heavily on luck. Also, spending her teenage years in a community which offered these opportunities (speech team, a black radio station, etc) must have been crucial to her success. --Colapeninsula (talk) 18:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

History of a metonym

On the page K Street and its associated talk page, as well as at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#K Street, there's been a discussion of how to incorporate the metonymic aspects of K Street (as another name for lobbying) with the street qua street. This would be greatly helped if anyone knew the history of the metonym--when did "K Street" become shorthand for the lobbying industry? And any ideas where one would go about researching something like this, ideally without spending a huge amount of time going through actual archival material? Thanks! Meelar (talk) 19:39, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Presumably electronic newspaper archives searchable by date would be your best bet. Google News Archives was trying to be that for a while (not sure what it is now). Maybe they should just rename the street "Jack Abramoff Boulevard" -- AnonMoos (talk) 07:01, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Seeking information on electoral fraud

1. What is the earliest known example of electoral fraud?
2. What are some websites where I can find good, general information on the subject of electoral fraud?--142.166.223.135 (talk) 20:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Election fraud is likely as old as elections. As soon as people realized that access to power depended on the choices made by other people, they would do underhanded things to influence those choices and/or to outright steal elections. The Royal elections in Poland were well known for being corrupt enterprises under the influence of foreign powers who used Poland as a place to hold proxy wars for their own ambitions (i.e. War of the Polish Succession). For much of its history, the papal conclave was under considerable influence from secular princes like the Holy Roman Emperor and the King of France, disputes over these elections and the influences of those princes on what was supposed to be the prerogative of the Cardinals resulted in the Western Schism. Now, admitedly these were not democratic elections, but the electors (the Sejm in Poland and the College of Cardinals in Catholicism) were, in theory, supposed to be free actors in choosing their monarch; in practice they were frequently open to corruption, which cast a shadow over the legitimacy of the electoral process. If there has been an electoral system, it has been defrauded at some point in history. If I have a vote, and someone else has money, you can expect that money will be used to buy my vote. --Jayron32 00:20, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Certainly common in ancient Rome, where they even had a word for it: ambitus, the crime of attempting to bribe or otherwise influence electors. I'm sure there was fraud in ancient Athens as well. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:58, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

January 6

UK "ethnic minority controversy" related question - looking for an article on something

This is a difficult question, and in a way there's no "right" place for it. I am looking for an article on a very distasteful controversy and can't find it. If there isn't one then I'm wondering if we have discussion of it.

I'm asking it here initially rather than an article talk page because these pages get archived faster and get less future attention - which is what should happen. I've collapsed it for the same reason.

Question

Background (how I got here) I've spent much of the last day or two editing and cleaning up the article on the influential murder of Stephen Lawrence, where the trial ended on January 3 - 4 and which changed the law, and arguably the UK. I've made related edits on its related legal articles such as private prosecution and double jeopardy. Before that I was editing the article on the Higgs boson, a major science topic, and in between some edits on fusion power. I often edit law topics and biographies, one of my GA's is on a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the right to silence. The Steve Lawrence case led to a very significant report on police racism in the 1990s, the Macpherson Report. That was the 1999 report that branded the UK police "institutionally racist" at the time so that report and the legal changes it proposed are very significant in legal history. I'd like to write up a full article on it. The report was commissioned by Jack Straw as Home Secretary, so I found myself at Jack Straw's article. Controversy Towards the end of that article was this item: "In January 2011, Straw provoked controversy with comments made on Newsnight about Pakistani men.[11] He said "there is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men ... who target vulnerable young white girls." [12]." I did what I often do and searched for an article or section to wikilink this to, but couldn't find one. (I did exactly the same for Judge Auld, author of the Auld Report mentioned in the Lawrence article). I checked on Google and my news searcher to see if the "Newsnight" controversy was a minor issue which would explain it, but instead found it's got very heavy coverage from many sources including some high profile attention in the UK media and news, and inquiries, investigations, charity concerns, politician comments. That doesn't mean there's anything to it, but does mean there's an article on it (or I'd expect one), if only to ensure we have neutral information on what seems to be a controversy with significant coverage. Mainly I'm looking for my own curiosity, and to see if the entry in Straw's bio is correct and neutrally stated. Examples of mentions (I won't paste most headlines or sources as I find them distasteful): Examples claiming there's a specific issue or at least a controversy or concern: The Times: [13] (grooming gang) [14] (dawn police raids on grooming gang) [15] (investigation into grooming) [16] (minister talks about grooming) Daily Mail: [17] ("top" detective criticizes lots of people on grooming) [18] (fears over damning report) Other pages (no need to list). Examples saying the issue may be mis-stated or wrong: [19] (perpetrators not of any specific ethnic group) [20] (worries over unjust stereotyping of a group because of a small sample or insufficent review of the matter) Examples of independent discussion of the issue: [21] (Asian network, BBC, titled "fallout from the pakistani grooming case") "Pakistani young men" are highlighted particularly in the above sources. That's in statements attributed to detectives, ministers, major politicians on highly influential news shows, major news media. It could be genuine, could be racism or stereotyping or selective attention, and it probably disgusts the British Pakistani community more than anyone else to see such claims.

My question's a simple one. Apologies if the answer is an easy wikilink, but do we have an article on this mess of allegations and claims, however it's described? Or past discussions of it on any talk page? I've looked but not having luck. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 01:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Do the articles Miscegenation and Anti-miscegenation laws seem related? It isn't directly the same idea, but the whole "The dark races are after the white women" theme is a part of history in the U.S., at least. Perhaps those threads could lead you somewhere. --Jayron32 04:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

We don't seem to have any article on the controversy; possibly if there was a public or parliamentary inquiry or other source of relatively impartial information, an article could be written, but if something exists only as controversial and unproven allegations then it's hard to write a neutral article on it. Not every news event deserves a Wikipedia page (WP:NOTNEWSPAPER) and the dispute was less far-reaching than others involving Jack Straw (e,g, British debate over veils, United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal, Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy, and the Iraq War). --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:09, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

@Jayron - a good idea, but that issue wasn't part of UK culture. It's in mainstream sources not given to such stuff, and got characterized as serious by some very reputable bodies and individuals also not prone to that sort of thing. I checked round - it was a specific issue that came up at a specific time maybe a year ago. Before that there was nothing of that kind. @Colapeninsula - in a way that would be the worst answer we could have, because if it has the characteristics of a substantial controversy that we would usually cover and not "just another news story/brief pointless allegations", then someone's going to end up writing that article, and mentioning it in / linking it to a bunch of related articles at some point. Do we have any case for "it might be a valid article but we shouldn't have one because it's obnoxious"? I can't think of any such case. I was hoping/expecting it existed and could just be checked for neutrality or read for curiosity to get the balanced picture. Are you sure we don't have it covered somewhere, or at least some discussion on it? FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 10:37, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

From what I recall, it was a rather brief controversy, which attracted only fleeting media attention. There are no end of stories given this amount of coverage, and few of them merit articles. Given that nobody wrote an article about it at the time, it seems unlikely that one will be written in future, unless the claims resurface. Better to cover it briefly in relevant articles - principally the one on Jack Straw. Warofdreams talk 17:31, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

My impression is that it is an issue of longer standing. Commentators may focus on the victims or the perpetrators, but no one is denying the problem. There is a BBC article today, "Specialist unit investigates grooming of teenage girls". It refers to Jack Straw, and has various people saying there is or isn't a racial dimension. BrainyBabe (talk) 16:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

A Dispatches documentary on Channel 4 recently covered this issue. The episode is still available on Channel 4's on-demand service. Astronaut (talk) 16:52, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Shaktism

Which Ethnic groups of South Asia practice the sect of Shaktism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.20.253 (talk) 02:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Reading the Wikipedia article titled Shaktism, the sense I get is that it is practiced, in some form, pretty much throughout Hindu-practicing parts of the world and isn't confined to any one ethnicity within the Hindu world. --Jayron32 04:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, I know that Bengali hindus are Shaktis but what about other ethnic groups of India? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.107.92 (talk) 15:44, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, Shaktism is not any kind of organized uniform movement or splinter from Hinduism, but is a general term for an emphasis on goddess-worship within Hinduism (sometimes associated with Tantrism, but by no means confined to it), so the term "sect" might not be very appropriate. AnonMoos (talk) 17:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Help me find the lost article: List of possible Antichrists (or something to that effect)

I read it years ago. I'm not sure about the title's exact string anymore. Among the listees were Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong-il. (Would have to be re-edited to Kim Jong-un at this point, unless the prophecy of the Antichrist coming back from the dead holds true, at which point we may include Osama bin Laden, who could return by hiking to and walking up out of a beach.)

But still, where is the article? I know it existed; I would not dismiss it as a hallucination. Thanks. --70.179.174.101 (talk) 02:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Those don't seem like good antichrists, to me. The AC is supposed to appear to be a "good guy" and have great charisma, attracting followers who are then led astray. bin Laden somewhat qualifies, but the majority of people on Earth knew he was evil all along. How about someone like Jim Jones ? StuRat (talk) 03:18, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

closest I can find is List of fictional Antichrists. There was, however, a similar article that was apparently deleted (deletion discussion here). --Ludwigs2 03:24, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The article Ludwigs notes exists from Wikipedia's halcyon youth. It was actually a horrific BLP violation that would likely be speedied today as an attack page. --Jayron32 04:01, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I think 'halcyon' should really be in scare-quotes... --Ludwigs2 04:08, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I think this is the point I go "Oh. My. God. I cannot beleiiiiiive that article...." FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 10:46, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

In Wikipedia's defense that article was created on April 6, 2005 and deleted April 11. (Also I consider 2001-2002 Wikipedia's youth. 2005 was more similar to today's.) Rmhermen (talk) 19:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

(For those who can't see deleted pages, it contains a list of purported characteristics of an antichrist, followed by a bunch of well-known individuals the user claims meets them. With laughable evidence, like "has mark on forehead". In encyclopedia or information terms, zero value and worse than useless. Headdesk. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 10:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC) )

Would that be Gorbachev? He was a pretty popular antichrist figure for a period of time [22], and did have that mark on his head. In fact, declaring people to be antichrists is a depressingly common thing [23]. I bet you could set some criteria, find some reliable sources, and make a pretty good list, if anyone wanted to put some time into it. Buddy431 (talk) 21:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

There were some who wondered (perhaps seriously, perhaps not) whether then-President Ronald Wilson Reagan was the "anti-Christ", given that there were 6 letters in each of his three names. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:20, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Hungary

Is there a legal framework by which the EU could force a change in government? I am particularly concerned with Hungary, but my question is broader in that could this be done for any country? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:41, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

No. The EU is a collection of sovereign states, internal politics is a matter for internal electorates. --Saalstin (talk) 11:05, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Even if the internal politics have been changed so that the ruling party, and only the ruling party, can be elected? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:13, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

How would that be any of the EU's business? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:18, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Well EU Charters and the treaties that entered it into force could well do exactly that... make it the EU's business. Of course when push comes to shove, "international law" is a secondary consideration. Shadowjams (talk) 11:19, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

This is what i am thinking of. The EU charter is supposed to be exactly designed for that. Unless I am reading it wrong. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I would be very surprised if any EU charter or treaty has provisions for forcing a change of government in a member state. What they most likely make provision for is an escalating scale of sanctions for any member state that disregards its treaty obligations. The ultimate sanction would be expulsion of a state from the EU. The closest precedent I can think of is Greenland. which voluntarily left the EC (predecessor of the EU) in 1985 because it disagreed with EC regulations around fishing rights. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:00, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

If a given EU country lives up to the EU rules, why would the EU care otherwise? Granted that might be a rather large "if". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The EU has previously imposed sanctions on its member Austria in protest at Austria forming a government including the far-right Freedom Party of Austria.[24] That would be a precedent, although the sanctions are described as being largely symbolic. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:13, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The other member states can respond to events, but only from an external perspective - other users have already referenced Austria elected the freedom party, which led to symbolic sanctions. The ultimate sanction states could impose would be if we all decided to kick another one out of the Union, but even then they would simply be a state with a government we didn't like outside the EU - there is simply no capacity, nor should there be, for one government, or 26 together, to install an alternative government in a member state --Saalstin (talk) 15:26, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Why is KägeTorä - (影虎) "particularly concerned with Hungary"? Is there a link to it? 88.14.198.215 (talk) 14:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The controversial new Constitution of Hungary, I assume. Warofdreams talk 17:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Out of interest, what European treaties/laws concern themselves with domestic elections? The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides for a right for EU citizens resident in another EU state to vote in its local elections on the same basis as its citizens - though I suppose it doesn't really guarantee that there have to be local elections, and it may or may not apply to the UK, Poland, and the Czech Republic anyway (due to their oddly-worded opt-out). There is Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR, which has presumably been ratified by all EU members (our article just says that Monaco and Switzerland have not ratified Article 1 of Protocol 1 - does that mean all other members of the Council of Europe have signed and ratified the whole protocol?). What else is there? In the hypothetical situation, would the justification for any EU sanctions be based on the ECHR, or something specific to the EU? 81.98.43.107 (talk) 15:40, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

What about the unelected 'national governments' in Greece and Italy? There is certainly a point of view that these were effectively imposed by the EU in order to agree the latest plan to save the Euro. Of course non of this happens within a legal framework, but then for all the arguments about treaty wordings the EU can be remarkably, umm, pragmatic when it comes to saving the project. 90.196.111.230 (talk) 16:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

fax machines

Did anyone ever say "We do not need to go to war now that we have fax machines", (or something similar), or was it just a dream I once had? Trellis Reserve (talk) 12:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Maybe it was meant in the sense that "we don't need to send reporters to war, we get news through fax." 88.14.198.215 (talk) 21:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Mary Custis Lee and Robert E. Lee Jr 1845.jpg

Is that child with Mary Custis Lee in this picture really Robert E. Lee, Jr.? If you ask me, that child looks more like girl than boy...-Henswick (talk) 12:51, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Infants of either sex were often dressed kind of doll-like or girlishly in those days. That general fact doesn't prove anything about this particular photo, though. More research of other family photos would be needed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

There wasn't really a stress on dressing boys masculinely almost from birth until as late as the 1920s. Before that time, "breeching" didn't occur before a boy had started walking... AnonMoos (talk) 14:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

A reference from Victorian Childhood: Themes and Variations By Thomas Edward Jordan: "A Victorian practice quite unlike our own was the practice of keeping boys in petticoats for several years...". Alansplodge (talk) 19:26, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The curls are also not exactly what one would associate with a boy. However I am no expert in 19th century childrens clothing, so they might surprise me (after all they took family photos of dead people so I am prepared for anything). --Saddhiyama (talk) 00:11, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The Lees also had four daughters, so perhaps the child in the image is really one of them. This image appears to be the same as this one, which is an original daguerreotype belonging to the Virginia Historical Society. Its image file in Wikimedia claims that it is public domain, because of its age, but the Virginia Historical Society says "Additional publication or distribution of this image without the explicit written consent of Virginia Historical Society is prohibited." Can an image old enough to be public domain in the US still be prohibited from unauthorized reproduction by the owner of the photo? Edison (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The can claim anything they want. It doesn't mean they can enforce it. --Jayron32 20:42, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Can something be public domain and have an owner at the same time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.9.214.197 (talk) 02:34, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Certainly. See Peter_and_Wendy#Copyright_status. In the UK, the original Peter Pan play is in the public domain, so it may be copied without incumberance. However, royalties are still due because of a special legislation to enforce a provision of J.M. Barrie's will which gave such royalties from performances to a Children's Hospital. --Jayron32 03:26, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

This painting of Queen Victoria's family in 1848, shows from the right, Prince Alfred in a frock and (standing at Victoria's knee) Prince Albert Edward with his hair curled in ringlets. This is three years after the Robert E Lee photo. Alansplodge (talk) 02:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The hair is nothing like the hair on the child shown in the photograph, though. The hair on the girl on the right is closer to it. --Saddhiyama (talk) 11:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I was trying to give you a reference that showed that small boys did wear dresses and did have their hair curled, which I believe I have done, even if it is not an exact match. You may interpret that information as you wish. Alansplodge (talk) 03:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate the attempt, and would not mind some more examples, because I am still not completely convinced that boys had ringlets in their hair. At least the painting shows a boy with long hair and natural curls rather than ringlets. That boys could wear dresses until a certain age is well documented (and of course we do have an article on it). --Saddhiyama (talk) 10:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Take a look at File:Governess.jpg, the first picture in the children's section in 1850s in fashion. Them's ringlets for sure. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 05:54, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Santa Claus letters

What does the post office do with all that mail to Santa? Or the Spanish post office with the letters to the biblical Magi for that matter.--85.52.88.200 (talk) 13:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

In Canada, at least, if you write a letter to Santa, he (or actually the post office employees) will write a letter back to you. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:13, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

In the UK, the Royal Mail will try to respond[25]; in the USA, local volunteers handle the letters[26]; in Canada, volunteers at Canada Post write back[27]. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:19, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Please see Santa Claus#Letter writing to Santa and Santa letters. -- ToE 15:31, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Somewhat related is the Club di Giulietta in Verona which answers letters written to Juliet Capulet. (These letters are the inspiration for the film Letters to Juliet and the album The Juliet Letters.) Does Wikipedia have any other articles on groups which answer letters to fictitious or non-living recipients? -- ToE 16:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The former occupants of 221B Baker Street used to employ someone for this purpose. Shimgray | talk | 19:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Years ago when I was a reporter, I did a story about the custodian at the local post office who volunteered to handle letters to Santa on his own time. Paraphrasing what I wrote at the time, the man took on the task presumably because the rest of the staff was so busy at that time of year, and letters to Santa needed special handling. The man told children he would look over the letters "for spelling and grammar," then use a special delivery system to get them to the North Pole. Shortly before Christmas, each child received a return letter from Santa, and their parents received a separate letter. (It's a small town, so there were just a few hundred letters, but none went unanswered.) — Michael J 06:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Please help (church questions)

hello,

please answer the questions below (these are important for this article):

1. Does it require permission from a bishop to create a parish?
2. Is a priest a "Father"?
3. Can someone reword this sentence: The 65 m long main aisle is five bays long, each with lateral arms one bay long., because of the dual use of "bays long"

Thanks. ♫GoP♫_T^C_N 21:58, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

1. Insofar as a parish is centered around a particular church, yes, it needs permission from a superior authority, since the church needs to be consecrated.

But why the source ([28]) does not name a superior authority, but it just says: In January 1990, a group of Catholics in Moscow formally founded the parish of the Immaculate Conception of the Holy Virgin Mary. Maybe the next sentence answers my question, but I don't quite understand it, as I lose track of so much terms. You need to explain it to someone, who don't know much about Catholicism :).--♫GoP♫_T^C_N 01:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

2. In the Catholic church, that is the term we use, though it doesn't mean he is literally anybody's dad.

But how about "Brother"? As I understand correctly, those terms are ranks. "Father" is higher than "Brother"; "Brother"s are those who work in the church, such as painter, baker, etc. But "Father" is a head? --♫GoP♫_T^C_N 01:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Brothers belong to religious teaching orders whose members are not priests. The Christian Brothers and the Marist Brothers fall into this category. Nothing to do with paintng or baking. It's also not about being higher or lower than priests; they're outside that structure completely. Within the priesthood, it goes priest > bishop > cardinal (it's a bit more nuanced than that, but that's essentially it). -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Your answer is very instructive and informative! :) ♫GoP♫_T^C_N 11:24, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

3. I'll leave this one to someone else. Mingmingla (talk) 22:46, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I added to the title to make it useful:

3) Not quite sure what "5 bays long" means, can you explain ? Instead of "long" you can say "in length", so "The main aisle is 65 m in length, ..." or "The main aisle extends for 65 m, ...". StuRat (talk) 22:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

It does make sense in Germany. "Joch" in English means "Bay", and in Germany it is also a unit. ♫GoP♫_T^C_N 01:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Unless I misunderstand query #3: The architectural term for for main aisle is nave. Parallel to the nave are the aisles. There may be a transept crossing the nave. The part where the altar is located is the apsis. There may be additional apses for the aisles.

A bay generally is the rectangle described by the four columns at its corners. In your sentence, each bay would be 13m long and have the width of the nave. The term "lateral arms" in your example presumably refers to the bays of the aisles (one or two) left and right of the nave, which seem to have the same length but may be narrower. As a "bay" is an area and not a unit of length, the last part of the sentence does not really make any sense.

If you provide us with the name of the church / cathedral or a reference to the text we may be able to clarify the matter. --Incognito.ergo.possum (talk) 00:21, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Our mellifluous OP did so with the "this article" link. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.78.41 (talk) 00:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Does it require permission from a bishop to create a parish? Not in Louisiana! Meelar (talk) 00:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the "father-brother" thing in Catholicism: It has 'nothing' to do with rank. "Father" is a term used for a priest (see Priesthood (Catholic Church)), whereas "brother" is a term used for a member of a monastic order (see Christian monasticism). While not all priests are pastors, the primary training and job of a priest in Catholicism is to be a pastor (i.e. leader of a church congregation), so the "father" name merely means that he is the leader of his congregation (the word "pastor" is also a euphamism as well, meaning "shepherd"). All priests may be called "father", even if the priest holds another job instead of being a pastor. Members of monastic orders are not intended to be leaders of church congregations, so they are brothers, and not fathers. Also, being a monk and a priest are not mutually exclusive. One can be both a member of a monastic order and a priest at the same time; and one can be one or the other without being both (i.e. one can be a priest without being a monk, and one can be a monk without being a priest). Other honorifics used in Catholicism include "Monsignor", which is accorded to priests who belong to certain orders, "Excellency", which is used for Bishops, and Eminence is used for cardinals of all ranks, whether cardinal deacons, cardinal priests, or cardinal bishops. --Jayron32 01:34, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Bishops are most usually addressed as "Your Grace", but it's a complex story. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:44, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Apparently only "your Grace" in Commonwealth countries and the Republic of Ireland; see Style (manner of address). Alansplodge (talk) 02:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your answers. Jayron's answer is like usual very significant and helpful. Now I have more knowledge in this area. Thanks again.♫GoP♫_T^C_N 11:24, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

To complicate things further, Bishops are NOT normally addressed as "Your Grace" - this form of address is reserved for Archbishops (and Dukes). This at least is the case in the Anglican Church. Also in the Anglican church, a priest may be addressed as "Father" if he is in a "high church" parish, otherwise he would be addressed as "Vicar/Rector" (depending on his appointment) or just as "Mr Smith".--rossb (talk) 16:27, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

ablaq masonry

What do we have for an article or partial article or section on ablaq masonry?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

We don't have anything specifically about ABLAQ (Arabic term for alternating light and dark courses of masonry), but you will find a lot of articles about it outside of WP. --Omidinist (talk) 04:46, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

This search shows that it is mentioned in many Wikipedia articles, it seems a common enough architectural element that it should stand up as an article topic. Ablaq is a redlink right now, but if someone could scrape together a few reliable sources, that could change. --Jayron32 04:56, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

That search is what Doug Coldwell, the gentleman who is himself a committed WPedian, must have done himself before his post. I think he is looking for more than that. --Omidinist (talk) 09:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I did do research on this before I made my post. Just wanted to make sure there was not already an article on it that perhaps I missed. It looks like there is much material out there and I am working up a draft now to make a complete article on it with a DYK. Jayron, that is why I delinked your redlink and stiked out your sentence so I could drop in an article when I am ready and yet have it qualify for a DYK (1500 characters) as a new article. Thanks for y'alls input.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

January 7

Aragon

What body had the power to choose the King of Aragon during the 1400s? Did the Barcelonan Consell de Cent have any rights to choose the King of Aragon? Understand that I am using a very loose termology for the word choose since the Kingdom of Aragon was only ceremonially elective at that point in history.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The article Compromise of Caspe may be useful to read. --Jayron32 01:38, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The underground war

I want to write an article about an underground war. I am looking for an authoritative source. Странник27 (talk) 12:06, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

What underground war, specifically? If it's underground then it may be a little difficult to find sources. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 12:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't unnderstand the question. By "underground war", do you mean a battle fought by badgers? A war fought in secret? Do you want information on one in particular, or any such conflict? --Saalstin (talk) 12:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I suppose he wants to make another fake article which will just get deleted anyway, as with his previous requests. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

There's a guerrilla war, is that what you mean ? StuRat (talk) 23:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Are there any non-military companies, organizations or countries whose secrecy rivals (or at least matches or is close to) that of Apple?

Apple is extremely notorious for secrecy that makes the CIA, FBI and even North Korea look like amateurs. But is there any company that does not work for the military, organization or country on Earth that has nothing to do with the military whose secrecy is even close to theirs? Honestly, I can't think of any (major) company or country that has such a level of secrecy (except North Korea), not even half of theirs, and even when a company is secretive, it is only focused on one part of the company (like trade secrets) but usually not the company as a whole; the only company I can remember was a small solar-power company called Bloom Energy (don't know if they're still in business); Apple is so secretive that it is likely to be the most secretive group of people of any kind in the world. And as a side question, exactly when and why did their obsession with secrecy begin in the first place? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 12:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Swiss banks? Probably many companies providing services to the wealthy. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:33, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

If a company plants to fill a patent, it has to keep things secret. If the things are worth something, the secrecy has to be tight. Apple is hardly an exemption here. 88.9.214.197 (talk) 15:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Many many technology companies are secretive like that. That's just part of doing business. Apple is not unusual in that regard. It's vital to keep your technical details secret until you've filed your patent, and it's vital to keep your product details secret until your scheduled announcement. The technical details are kept secret to avoid them being ripped off, and the product details are kept secret to give competitors as little time as possible to "top" them. (While still leaving enough time for your advertising people to do their magic. It's a balancing act.) 00:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

It's hard to compare, or even evaluate, levels of corporate secrecy, but certainly in the 80's IBM had a reputation for it similar to that of Apple today. I recall a story in the 80's that a different division of IBM was working on its own comparable machine at the same time as the PC was being developed, and that it actually launched at about the same time: the story ran that it was quickly withdrawn and hushed up. I have no evidence for that though, and I think it would be hard to research. But stories of that kind, whether true or not, are indicative of the way that IBM's secrecy was regarded. --ColinFine (talk) 12:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Does anyone know any good quotes relating to beginning/ amateur poets?

Hi all, I was writing my first ever sonnet, and I knew it would be pretty horrible, but it turned out so bad that I had to finish it with: "This illustrates an oft-repeated theme/ Beginning poets should stick to..." then I can't think of anything. Is there any "official" line (ie. the word of snobs) on how amateur/ bad poets should go about hiding their badness? I know there's plenty of stuff, like this, about how they usually don't hide their faults, but I felt there had to be some genuine advice from the masters to the wannabes, either telling them how to hide it or (as an alternative) how to identify lack of talent. IBE (talk) 13:44, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I ask myself, how should I hide, the badness of my verse?

And what would be left on the page when hidden be this curse?

Good poetry? How could that be? If talent I do lack?

The bottom line, is simply that, the page would just be bla(n/c)k. (Ouch...)

By the way, you're in good company See also: This article --NorwegianBlue ^talk 20:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

More seriously, a prerequisite for writing good prose, poetry or whatever, is that you have a story to tell that is worth remembering. Poetry predates literacy, and originated as a device for propagating information unaltered from generation to generation ( — yes, I know). Rhythm and rhyme make your story easier to remember, and more difficult to change without breaking the rhythm or the rhyme. Kind of like a checksum. I interpret your question as being primarily about the technicalities of rhythm and rhyme. (My feeble attempt above proves that I am totally unqualified in giving advice about that). But keep in mind that no amount of wordsmithery can make a dull story exciting. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 00:02, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The only way yo be a good writer (of any sort) is to let yourself be a bad writer and force yourself to read what you write. think of it as literary homeopathy - poison yourself with your own writing and your brain will scramble to write better out of sheer self-preservation. Don't show anything to anyone until you can read through it all the way yourself without wincing or gagging. Then show it to people to see what they wince and gag at.

Remember, even professionals start out bad. Frost's first draft of Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening started out: "Whose woods these are I think I know./His house is in the village though;/He will not see me stopping here/To drink a half a cask of beer." Or so I'm told, anyway… --Ludwigs2 01:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

A good illustration of the principle that asking a quirky question can get you a really interesting answer. (NB I don't personally care much about NOR on the ref desks, since it's impossible to police it here.) Curiously, there are mentions of the poverty of inspiration in several places in Shakespeare's sonnets - in fact it was Sonnets 100 and 101 that inspired me to have a go. I mean, if he can't do it, there's a good chance that I might not be able to either, and since it didn't stop him... Basically it seems whenever Shakespeare addresses his Muse in his sonnets, he's having a whinge at her for lack of inspiration. Maybe if he'd started with a prayer to the Muse in the first sonnet he wouldn't have found himself writing a complaint later. And maybe he would have written a much longer poem. IBE (talk) 03:34, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Just between you and me, I've always been more fond of Keats' sonnets than Shakespeare's. Shakespeare was a playwright; not that his poetry was bad, but it wasn't his forte. --Ludwigs2 06:36, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

And since we're talking off the record, I've always thought Shakespeare was overrated in many ways, but I have a grudging admiration for even the worst of his writing. Personally I can sympathise with bits of Tolstoy's essay, and I could never take Lear seriously on psychological grounds. I just like the fancy dialogue. IBE (talk) 07:02, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

George Orwell thought Tolstoy disliked Lear so much because of the similarity of Tolstoy's later life to Lear... --Shirt58 (talk) 08:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Tolstoy was only getting started with Shakespeare. He wrote to Anton Chekhov, You know I can't stand Shakespeare's plays, but yours are even worse. He was a good hater, old Fatso Tolstoy. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:51, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, you know, Shakespeare was kind of the George Lucas of his day, given more to iconic moments with broad public appeal than real artistry (think of Hamlet's soliloquy as roughly equivalent in impact and function as the light-sabre battle between Vader and Obi-Wan). I can see why Tolstoy hated him: Tolstoy was erudite and tended to write characters with a vast nobility of spirit; in Shakespeare everyone is crude, rude, and boisterous (add jocularly cynical for the comedies and myopically self-centeredly for the tragedies). Tolstoy couldn't help but look at Shakespeare with the same attitude he'd look at a poem starting "There was a young lady from Kent…" --Ludwigs2 17:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Pope's An Essay on Criticism might be the sort of thing the OP is looking for. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 10:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

That is a great essay - I only wish it were an essay, rather than a secret code that only poets know. Still, I think it's telling me things I have long been aware of, but wanted a more literary source for. Yes, when you hear "You hurt me, and you make me cry" you know what's coming - "But if you leave me," ... much appreciate the link, IBE (talk) 13:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

New Hampshire Primaries

Which states have tried to move their primary before New Hampshire? --CGPGrey (talk) 16:09, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Does the info in the Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2012 article help? RudolfRed (talk) 23:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

What title would Camilla have if she outlives Charles?

If Charles, as king, is outlived by Camilla, what would her title be? Quasi-Queen Mother? --90.220.162.186 (talk) 16:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

She will retain her current title - Dutchess of Cornwall. Blueboar (talk) 16:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

But what if William has a male heir apparent? --90.220.162.186 (talk) 16:25, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I believe she becomes the Dowager Queen. Queens retain the title of "Queen" after the death of their husband, see Mary of Teck. Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother got that title as a courtesy, to avoid confusion with her daughter (also Queen Elizabeth). This is all assuming Camilla receives the title of "Queen". It may not happen, she may just retain the title of Duchess of Cornwall as Blueboar said. And besides which, Charles may not succeed his mother... --TammyMoet (talk) 16:46, 7 January 2012 (UTC) Our article Queen Dowager explains the situation in more detail, and also the difference between a Queen Dowager and a Queen Mother. Camilla would, of course, not be the latter but would be the former. --TammyMoet (talk) 16:47, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

(ec) Ah... I had forgotten that the title of "Duke of Cornwall" is traditionally (by statute?) granted to eldest male heir of the Monarch... so... presumably when Charles becomes King, the title "Duke of Cornwall" will be transferred to his eldest son, William (and Kate would presumably become "Duchess of Cornwall")... if so, King Charles will have to come up with a new title for his wife (This will probably be "Duchess of ____" with the blank filled in by one of several Dukedoms that are directly attached to the Monarch... perhaps "Duchess of Lancaster"). Blueboar (talk) 16:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

This BBC News article should clear things up. The plan is for her to use the style Princess Consort. --Tango (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think a "Queen Camilla" would considerably advance the cause of republicanism in the UK. Dbfirs 19:13, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

So, it's OK for her to be the Queen, as long as nobody calls her "Queen", eh? Who's fooling whom here? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Putting up with her being in the background might be accepted with just a minimum of resentment, but actually calling her queen would reawaken republicanism, in my opinion, but we'll see .... perhaps Charlie will abdicate, or perhaps he won't outlive his mother? Dbfirs 13:21, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I believe that is an outdated view. In the UK, the "Diana thing" is, for the overwhelming majority of people, ancient history now, and I suspect that Camilla is at least as popular as her husband. Which might not be saying a lot, but she is certainly much less unpopular than she was a few years ago. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:57, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Blueboar, the title Duke of Cornwall is inherited by the eldest son of the reigning monarch either at birth or at their parent's accession to the throne. Prince Charles became Duke of Cornwall the moment his mother became Queen, which was the moment his grandfather George VI died. Should Elizabeth die tomorrow, Charles would become King and his elder son William would automatically become Duke of Cornwall; he'd continue to also be Duke of Cambridge and Prince William. See Duke of Cornwall and Duchy of Cornwall.

As for Camilla, she couldn't continue to be Duchess of Cornwall, because that title would now belong to William's wife Catherine. Camilla could be the Dowager Duchess of Cornwall, at least until such time as William died before becoming King himself, in which case Catherine would be the Dowager Duchess. The Duke of Cornwall would then go into abeyance because it belongs to the eldest son of the monarch, not the eldest surviving son (Harry). When Charles dies, the eldest son of whoever succeeds him would be the new Duke of Cornwall (Will's eldest child would be the new monarch if Will's already dead; but if he died without issue, it'd be King Henry IX) . -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:32, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Is there any precedent for the term "Dowager" being used when a woman's husband has ceased to be the current holder of title due to becoming King, rather than death? --Tango (talk) 19:57, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I very much doubt it. Dowager says A dowager is a widow who holds a title or property, or dower, derived from her deceased husband. It's never applied to wives of living people. Apart from subverting the word to mean something it just doesn't mean, and confusing the whole royal-watching world in the process, why would the consort of a very much alive reigning king not want to be known as Queen? (They say Camilla will be called "Princess Consort", but time will tell.) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 23:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The Duke of Cambridge will become the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cornwall, the Duchess of Cambridge will become the Princess of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall.
Sleigh (talk) 01:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

That's right, as long as Charles deems to make him Prince of Wales, which he is not required to do. Charles himself was not created Prince of Wales until 1958, when he was 9 years old. If Will's given the nod, he would generally be referred to as "Prince William the Prince of Wales" but he would still hold whatever other titles he has. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Before his creation as Duke of Cambridge, Prince William's official title was "Prince William of Wales". The name sewn on his RAF uniform was "Wales", as it was for Harry. (By the way, Prince Charles's investiture as Prince of Wales took place in 1969.) --TammyMoet (talk) 09:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, 1969. But an investiture to a Prince of Wales is like a coronation to a monarch: They always postdate the person’s occupation of the office involved. Prince of Wales#Other titles and investiture says: Princes of Wales may be invested, but investiture is not necessary to be created Prince of Wales. As I said, Charles was created PofW on 26 July 1958. He was not invested until 1 July 1969 but he’d still been PofW since 1958. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:53, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

So... to get back to the original question... What title will she have when Charles dies? That depends on a) whether Charles outlives Queen Elizabeth, and b) if he does what title Camilla is given when Elizabeth dies... and while there is lots of speculation as to what title will be given to Camilla when Elizabeth dies... the real answer is: We don't know... yet. Blueboar (talk) 16:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

A world away from your original answer - but that's a good thing in this case.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 20:21, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

US House of Representative and Senate seats New York Dearborn Minneapolis

Which district of House of Representative does New York City fall into? Which district of House of Representative does Dearborn, Michigan fall into? Which district of House of Representative does Minneapolis, Minnesota fall into? Which district of House of Senate does New York City fall into? Which district of House of Senate does Dearborn fall into? Which district of House of Senate does Minneapolis fall into? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.155.66 (talk) 19:53, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

New York City is covered by more than one district. You can look up the districts by zip code at house.gov or try this map. RudolfRed (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

You can see maps of the House of Representatives districts at New York's congressional districts, Michigan's congressional districts, and Minnesota's congressional districts. The United States Senate does not have districts. Every senator is elected by the whole state "at large". You can see each state's two senators at List of current United States Senators. --Jayron32 20:22, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

As to why the districts for the House of Representatives look the way they do: see our article on Gerrymandering. Blueboar (talk) 16:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

January 8

Identities of the two ministers who betrayed Liliuokalani

Who were the two ministers who betrayed Queen Liliuokalani to the Committee of Safety (Hawaii) before the overthrow? Her ministers at the time were Samuel Parker (Foreign Affairs), William H. Cornwell (Finance), John Francis Colburn (Interior) and Arthur P. Peterson (Attorney General).--KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Erotic asphyxiation

Hello.

My english is not god, but please try to figure out what i write.

There have for many years been believed that Erotic asphyxiation, is about,is the intentional restriction of oxygen to the brain for sexual arousal. This is because this is what people think. Or what the people who write about it thinks. They only trying to find a reason,because they dont really know why. Of course some people also like that. But this is not the main reason for many.

Its about something else, Its about masochism. Many masochist want to be helpless, tied up and used for different stuff. The feeling of being tied up and dragged to a waiting noose, and then hang there helpless waiting to die. This is what it,s really about.

That you cant breath is also a big factor. Some people also get turned on by this.

But i dont think that many people really like that the blood cant reach the brain. Because this will only make you faint\pass out. Its acctually the biggest problem with being hanged, you pass out very fast. When the blood dont reach the brain. I watched many "videos" of people been hanged (Iran etc.). Most of them, allmost everyone, pass out, right away!

So as i see it there are not only one simple explanation to things. The reason i know this is that i,am a masochist. And being tied up and draged to a waiting noose, and then hang there helpless waiting to die. Is my biggest and best fetish. Not that i actually ever been hanged up(suspended). But the noose is being pulled until i cant breath. One thing more to mention (i give all the facts), the first time i,am strangled i faint fast. Because my brain dont get blood. But the other 9-15 times I,am being strangled, i will not faint. But would actually die of suffocation before i faint. (of course my girlfriend know to stop, when i start to struggle for air.) So now you got it from the horses mouth.

Hope you believe this too be correct, as it is. And that you use the information on Wikipedia. I,am only so tired of that the hole world going around not knowing all the facts. But I,am also used to that people don't believe me, and that wrong information is the standard. Except Wikipedia, you have a fantastic god concept going here. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.74.36.31 (talk) 20:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

It's well-established that erotic asphyxiation can produce sensations of euphoria. But you may well be right that some people enjoy it for other reasons. If you believe this isn't fully covered in the article, you should post a comment on the article's talk page Talk:Erotic asphyxiation. Your theory can't be added to the article unless there are published sources that agree with you, but by all means write on the talk page, which is the proper place for discussing the content of an article. (You can write a comment on the talk page exactly the same way as you post questions here.) --Colapeninsula (talk) 20:59, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

my english is not god MahAdik _usap 22:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Ron Paul's military service

In last night's debate, Ron Paul mentioned having served in the US military. Our article says he was an Air Force flight surgeon. Any idea where he served? His service years would have been at the beginning of the Vietnam War. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 20:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

His own website says "Ron Paul is a proud Air Force veteran. He served as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force from 1963 to 1965 and then in the U.S. Air National Guard from 1965 to 1968. During his military service Ron Paul spent time on the ground in Iran, Pakistan, South Korea, Turkey, Ethiopia and other countries."[29] I can't find independent confirmation.

I can only speculate as to what he did. Turkey and South Korea had long-term USAF bases; Iran and Pakistan were US allies at the time (receiving US aircraft, etc); and the US military had various (largely peaceful) roles in Ethiopia (e.g. training and mapmaking). He later qualified as an ob-gyn, for which there is perhaps less call in war-zones, but he would have been able to do a wider range of work in his early years. --Colapeninsula (talk) 21:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 22:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Canadian

I'm confused about this statement: "According to the 2006 census, the largest self-reported ethnic origin is Canadian (32%),[Note 3] followed by English (21%), French (15.8%)..."

I'm pretty sure that almost all Canadians are descendants from either British or French people. To me Canadians are descendants of British and French people. Why is there something like ethnic origin Canadian? Is there native Canadian like native America before the British or French came in? Are they really the majority of Canadian?Trongphu (talk) 21:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

You are wrong in thinking that "almost all" Canadians are descended from British or French immigrants. Canada had a sizeable aboriginal population, and as mentioned in our Canada article section Demographics and the fuller Demographics of Canada article, "There are 600 recognized First Nations governments or bands encompassing 1,172,790 people." This number doubtless excludes many who are not officially members of such nations/bands but are nevertheless also at least partly descended from those aboriginal peoples.

However, the main source of your confusion is that the ethnicities listed in the census are, as stated, self-reported. Evidently a great many Canadians choose to describe their ethnicity as Canadian, rather than whatever their European immigrant ancesters of anything up to 350 years ago were. Also, many Canadians will be descended from a, probably not precisely known, mixture of English, French and other ethnicities, so "Canadian" may be a better description of them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.166 (talk) 23:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The OP is implying that a person's ethnic origin should be defined by the place from which one's ancestors came to the present country of residence. The obvious question is "How far back does one look?" Obviously the First Nations people in Canada have ancestors who arrived from eastern Russia, but we don't count that. I have mostly Scottish ancestors, but some were Huguenot people, who had previously emigrated from France to Scotland. That was over 300 years ago. The Scottish folk left there 170 years ago. I don't think of myself as ethnically French or Scottish. Should I? HiLo48 (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Unless someone else is requiring your description to conform to particular criteria, it's up to you. Ultimately, we're all African (probably). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.166 (talk) 01:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Sure, modern Canadians descend from people who came there from somewhere else. But 'English' people, and 'French' people do likewise - 'England' in particular is a mongrel 'nation', being formed of successive waves of Celts, Romans, Saxons, Vikings, French - ultimately we're all human, what you describe as your 'ethnic origin' is a political opinion of with where you wish to identify - as Canada grows older, it stands to reason that its inhabitants will more want to deem themselves 'at home', rather than people who've settled. --Saalstin (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

• The OP's question reminds me of A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. When the young girl protagonist, Francie, goes to school the teacher asks each child what their ethnicity is, each kid says things like "Irish" and "Italian". One of Francie's classmates answers "American"; everyone is incredulous as if that child doesn't understand the question, however it turns out that all of her relatives that she knows about, including her parents, grand-parents, great-grand-parents, etc, have all been born in the U.S., so the teacher and classmates concede that she really is genuinely American. Ultimately, ethnicity is a self-defined trait: if a person self-identifies as Canadian, who is anyone else to decide that they are not. --Jayron32 02:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

• I am Canadian (And so can you!) :D-- Obsidi♠n Soul 04:51, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

• I see this all the time. Some of my clients identify as aboriginal, yet many of them don't have what would be considered "typical" aboriginal features. To me, that's a "so what" issue. But as far as some of my colleagues are concerned, they're claiming a status that is not accurate, or only true to a limited degree. The argument is always about how much "aboriginal blood" they have - 1/2, 1/4, 1/64, 1/256, whatever - and in my colleagues' minds there's some magical percentage below which one cannot legitimately claim aboriginality. I tell them it has less to do with "blood" and much more to do with their self-identification and their acceptance by the aboriginal community as a member of that community. If they meet those criteria, and they do have some aboriginal DNA no matter how little, then they are aboriginal and, to echo my esteemed colleague Jayron's words, "who is anyone else to decide that they are not?". -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]}
• Everyone should simply answer any "ethnicity/race" questions with: "Human". Eventually they would get the point and stop asking such stupid and irrelevant questions. Blueboar (talk) 03:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Except that the question is not necessarily irrelevent. It only seems irrelevnt if you come from a privileged ethnicity/race/group. People who come from cultural groups who are systematically discriminated against by their society, either in an official context, or merely socially, are acutely aware that their ethnicity matters, and matters a whole bunch. Wishing that it didn't matter in those ways does not make such a wish true. Insofar as a government seeks to end discrimination against people because of their ethnicity, and insofar as a government needs to know what a person's ethnicity is to know whether or not they are being treated badly because of that ethnicity, that data is useful to collect. If you don't want to answer the question when asked, that is quite your prerogative, and I will not begrudge you one bit for it, but that does not mean it is an invalid question; or that ethnicity doesn't "matter". It matters a lot. Maybe it shouldn't, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't. --Jayron32 03:26, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The fourth-most-frequent answer in the US census for "ancestry" is "American." It's an especially popular answer in the South, where a lot of people used to answer "English." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:01, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Quebec

I know this province in Canada has French as an official language. I wonder how can this province communicate with other provinces like discussions in the government? Is there a mandatory to learn English as a second language at school?Trongphu (talk) 21:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Children of traditional English-speaking communities have a right to be taught English as a first language in school, but this does not extend to immigrants and others... AnonMoos (talk) 22:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

What do you mean? I'm asking about school in Quebec, where they mainly speak French!Trongphu (talk) 22:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

What he means is that there are English-speaking communities in Quebec, and in those communities, schools will teach in English. To answer your question, as noted below, all Quebecois who are educated enough to take an active role in government almost universally speak English. A disproportionate number of recent Prime Ministers of Canada have come from Quebec, and they all speak English just fine. You may also be interested in reading the Wikipedia article English-speaking Quebecer. --Jayron32 02:06, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

In my experience, most people in Quebec also speak English, with the exception of those at the low end of the socioeconomic ladder, who may only speak French, but also don't have much interaction with those who only speak English. The reverse is also true in the rest of Canada. That is, in addition to their first language of English, most people also speak some French, again with the exception of those at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. It's interesting to ponder if failure to learn a second language causes their lower status, or is a consequence of it. StuRat (talk) 23:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Sessions of Parliament, committee hearings and I suppose other such meetings always have simultaneous translation into English or French when someone is speaking the other language. Federal government documents are always made available in both languages. As stated above, all of the head guys in Quebec speak English just fine, even if they may prefer not to. All of the recent prime ministers have also spoken French no matter what part of Canada they come from. All kids in the country are supposed to learn both languages but most people actually only speak one or the other. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:55, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

January 9

Criticism of University

I want to know the criticisms of the common system of higher education, specially university. of course if there is any. Flakture (talk) 05:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Wikipedia Reference Desk. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation, but it is our policy here not to do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn nearly as much as doing it yourself. Please attempt to solve the problem or answer the question yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know. RudolfRed (talk) 06:00, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't know what here appears to be homework. I think by copying this template here you mean this is a general question, so your right. that doesn't help answering if you did want help. here we can know about aspect of the subject that we didn't encounter before. I appreciate the answer of anyone who this one doesn't appear homework to him. Flakture (talk) 06:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)