Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Reference Desk

Science Mathematics Computing/IT Humanities Language Entertainment Miscellaneous Archives
How to ask a question Search first. It's quicker, because you can find the answer in our online encyclopedia instead of waiting for a volunteer to respond. Search Wikipedia using the searchbox. A web search could help too. Common questions about Wikipedia itself, such as how to cite Wikipedia and who owns Wikipedia, are answered in Wikipedia:FAQ.
Sign your question. Type ~~~~ at its end. Be specific. Explain your question in detail if necessary, addressing exactly what you'd like answered. For information that changes from country to country (or from state to state), such as legal, fiscal or institutional matters, please specify the jurisdiction you're interested in. Include both a title and a question. The title (top box) should specify the topic of your question. The complete details should be in the bottom box. Do your own homework. If you need help with a specific part or concept of your homework, feel free to ask, but please don't post entire homework questions and expect us to give you the answers. Be patient. Questions are answered by other users, and a user who can answer may not be reading the page immediately. A complete answer to your question may be developed over a period of up to seven days.	Do not include your e-mail address. Questions aren't normally answered by e-mail. Be aware that the content on Wikipedia is extensively copied to many websites; making your e-mail address public here may make it very public throughout the Internet. Edit your question for more discussion. Click the [edit] link on right side of its header line. Please do not start multiple sections about the same topic. Archived questions If you cannot find your question on the reference desks, please see the Archives. Unanswered questions If you find that your question has been archived before being answered, you may copy your question from the Archives into a new section on the reference desk. Do not request medical or legal advice. Ask a doctor or lawyer instead.
After reading the above, you may ask a new question by clicking here. Your question will be added at the bottom of the page.
How to answer a question Be thorough. Please provide as much of the answer as you are able to. Be concise, not terse. Please write in a clear and easily understood manner. Keep your answer within the scope of the question as stated.	Link to articles which may have further information relevant to the question. Be polite to users, especially ones new to Wikipedia. A little fun is fine, but don't be rude. The reference desk is not a soapbox. Please avoid debating about politics, religion, or other sensitive issues.

June 22

Can you be more specific? Perhaps you should read the wiki article June 22. (I know, I know! So now I finally get why the words "suitly emphazi" (or whatever) are so hilarious to all of you!) Loomis 12:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Have you by any chance been enbribd? --Lambiam^Talk 01:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Is that somehow related to pastatution? Loomis 01:12, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

ISTR we answered this question on June 17th - please don't repeat your posts. I also notice that "June 22" is also on the other Reference desk pages, and the rules at the top say not to cross-post. Grutness...wha? 02:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I think that's a rather narrow interpetation of the rules, Grutness. I see "June 22" as an entirely separate question from "June 17", requiring just as much serious consideration. JackofOz 04:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

It seems apparent to me that, being a higher number, 22/17 of the attention given "June 17" is required here. — Lomn | Talk 05:02, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

The Da Vinci Code DVD

I was going to ask this on the talk page of The Da Vinci Code, but this seemed more appropriate. Does anyone know when the DVD is going to be released? I can't seem to find that anywhere.--Rayc 02:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You'd have to ask the studio. I doubt that any release date has been made public yet. The film has only just been released in cinemas, after all. DVD release is normally about a year later. --Richardrj 09:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Normally it goes: Sneak Peak (the reviewers see it), Major Release, Second-Tier (discount theater) Release, Airline Release/Pay-Per-View, DVD/Rental Release, Television Release. Channels like HBO and Showtime have tried to get movies before they are available for purchase, but I don't think that's ever worked. Also, some movies go in a different order for various reasons. Pulp Fiction was in art houses only for a few weeks, but was too popular. So, it went to major release. First Blood was a flop that went to HBO, where it became so popular that it went to video. Someone recently released a movie in major release and video at the same time (Steven Soderheim???). As for the dates, it is all about the money. When you get the money you need from one step of the release cycle, you move to the next. --Kainaw ^(talk) 16:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the film that went to theatres and DVD simultaneously was Crash, 2005. The director and producers were afraid that it would never get sufficient distribution and felt that they had a great movie. They did. In that case, the strategy worked, in terms of critical support and word of mouth. I'm not sure how well it did in theatrical release before the Academy Awards, but it had a new release afterward. Geogre 13:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I just found it. I was thinking of Bubble. Released in Movies, Cable, and DVD at the same time. --Kainaw ^(talk) 17:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

How-to for creating urban vinyl figures?

I can't seem to find any information in regards to how one goes about designing and creating urban vinyl figures (like the work of Michael Lau, and stuff on kidrobot.com). Anybody have any leads? Javguerre 02:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

The stuff on kidrobot is just vinyl stuffed dolls. Instead of using cloth to make a doll, use vinyl. Basically, you have to learn to sew first. Then, practice with the material you want to use. --Kainaw ^(talk) 12:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Liqueur Reference Sources?

I'm currently trying to build the article on Parfait Amour on this very website, but have had some considerable trouble finding any reference material regarding the non-mixology aspects of the drink (like history, variation, definitions of the drink, etc). I'd like to ask, does anyone know of any useful references regarding this? Preferably either web-available, or conceivably available in Australia. -- Kirby1024 04:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Is it a psychedelic rock ??

Hi! i've been wondering for long about the genre of the following song : Song name - Bheegi bheegi Film - Gangster (2006) Singer - James (Nagar baul)

   You can listen to the track here

In case, you are unable to do so , you may try googling for this Bollywood track. Though i know nothing about Genres of song, i think, it might be a Psychedelic Rock .I don't know whether lyric would be a factor!?!

Thanking you in anticipation,--Pupunwiki 05:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

---

Reformatted comments to make them easier to read

After a quick Google search, I came across this page which seemed to think the genre was "devotional/religious", but I have no idea if this is the song you're looking for! EvocativeIntrigue _{TALK | EMAIL} 12:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

   No that's certainly not a devotional song... & the singer is
different too. Anyhow, thanks for spending your time.
                --Pupunwiki 12:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Classifying one song as psychedelic rock can be difficult. I would refer to articles such as the one about Psychedelic music for information about what is generally considered 'Psychedelic'.

--LBJacob09 8:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Assistance

I am currently taking part in a quiz and was wondering if you could help me with some questions.

http://img221.imageshack.us/my.php?image=2b7ox.jpg who is this a statue of?

http://img214.imageshack.us/my.php?image=41kt1.jpg What this plant is? Its named after the creature it attracts.

Youre help would be much appreciated as always.

I don't know the answers, but I saw you had another link to a picture of a bridge which you have now taken down. Did you get the answer to that one? I'd like to know where it is - it looked like an awesome bridge. Thanks. --Richardrj 15:47, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Its called the Maulli Bidge over the river Tarn.

So does anyone have an idea on my questions?

I believe the plant is a buddleia aka butterfly bush, or a summer lilac.

The geezer on the plinth is Pushkin. MeltBanana 01:28, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought it was Pushkin! Is that the Hermitage behind him? User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

No the Mikhailovsky Palace or Russian Museum but only a short walk away. MeltBanana 02:16, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Australia belongs to Asia or Oceania?

From my general knowledge, Australia is a Oceanian country. However, Australia is now a member of Asian Football Confederation, but not Oceania Football Confederation.

I am asking if Australia belongs to both Asia and Oceania, if not, why Australia could join the Asian Football Confederation.

Australia is in Oceania, the football team recently left the OFC and joined the AFC because it was fed up with the big fish little pond scenario. Basically, they were fed up being the best of the worst, baceause the OFC doesnt get any world cup places, and Australia has to play-off with losing CONCACAF teams. Philc _T^E_C^I 16:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You triple posted this question! dont do that. Philc _T^E_C^I 17:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, consider India. India is a subcontinent. India is in ASIA. India is in south Asia, and it is a subcontinent. Consider Australia. Australia is a continent. This fact might seem obvious, but it bears repeating: AUSTRALIA is a CONTINENT. And again: AUSTRALIA...is a... CONTINENT. Hope this helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 17:07, June 22, 2006 (UTC) (talk • contribs) 82.131.189.199

These are nice lyrics. Do you have a melody that goes with it? --Lambiam^Talk 17:59, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

It is pretty easy to look at Asia and Oceania and see the maps. But, the question was about sports. Why are the Kansas City Chiefs in the AFC West when Kansas City is about as close to the middle of the United States as you can get? Sports divisions don't always make sense geographically. --Kainaw ^(talk) 17:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

(After edit conflict) That response is a little too abrupt I think. You may wish to moderate your tone in future. Australia is both a country and a continent. The term Oceania is often mistaken to be the name of the continent, but is in fact just a name for the region. Likewise, the name Australasia is used for a slightly different region centred around Australia. One of the reasons for Australia deciding to leave the Oceania Football Confederation to join the Asian Football Confederation is that the OFC does not currently have a guaranteed spot in the World Cup finals. As to why they were alowed to change confederations, that is probably a choice for FIFA. Road Wizard 17:49, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

What a pillock shouting autralia is a continent at him, no-one mentioned continents, only football federations. Philc _T^E_C^I 22:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Last time I checked, athletic organizations don't exactly have much authority in political or geographical matters. The Toronto Blue Jays are in the American League, but that doesn't mean that the entire city has been annexed by the US. Similarly, the National Hockey League began in Canada, but NHL teams are now overwhelmingly located in the US. What "nation" is the NHL refering to then? The same can be said of the National Basketball Association. Now with the Toronto Raptors, what "nation" is the NBA referring to? Even the Canadian Football League, some years back included several teams located in US cities, namely Las Vegas, Birmingham, Memphis, Shreveport, San Antonio and Sacramento. Does that mean that these six important US cities were briefly part of Canada? My simple point is that the "league" that a particular sports team decides to join is pretty much irrelevant when it comes to political or geographic matters. Loomis 21:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Hope this response meets with your approval, RoadWizard, and that the mild sarcasm was acceptable. Also, I can't help but tell you that I believe you were overly judgemental with regard to one of the responses above. A little levity never hurt anyone. An apology would seem to be in order. Loomis 21:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Why me? I think RoadWizard's admonishment was meant for lyricist 82.131.189.199. --Lambiam^Talk 22:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Why in the world would I apologise to Lambian when my comments were directed at 82.131.189.199. Lambian's comment was added 10 minutes after mine. I assume that you are trying to be humorous, but I can't quite see the joke. As to why I said the comment by 82.131.189.199 was too abrupt is because very few people I have encountered know that the proper name for the continent on which Australia rests is the "Australian continent" and I don't think you can call the tone of 82.131.189.199's comment mild. Road Wizard 22:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I meant apologize to 82.131.189.199. I originally wrote Lambiam but quickly changed it when I realized it was 82.131.189.199 you were refering to. Sorry Lambiam, my mistake. As for my remark, no, I wasn't trying to be humourous, just trying to point out that while 82.131.189.199's "tone" may have been somewhat inappropriate, your taking it upon yourself to admonish him/her was far more innapropriate. If someone says something truly offensive, tell them so. However, if you merely disapprove of their "tone", please keep it to yourself. We're all grown-ups here, we don't need to be chided by self-righteous, self-appointed "wiki-police". Loomis 22:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The Football Federation Australia has a good explanation as to why Australia wanted to join the Asian confederation. The Asian Confederation is likely to have accepted Australia because it offered several opportunities for them - getting the AFC Champions League, the Asian Cup, and a bunch of World Cup qualifiers televised in a wealthy country. The only country for whom it'll be a major downside is Saudi Arabia, who won't be making up the numbers at the next World Cup unless Asia gets another place (the Saudis are the worst team in the Cup by some margin). Geographically, the time zones (which are the most important thing for televising the games) work better for Japan, South Korea and China (the big TV markets) from Australia than they do for the countries in the Middle East.

In any case, if you want some examples of geographical anomalies, most of Turkey is geographically in Asia, as is the majority of Russia. But those countries play in the UEFA competitions. --Robert Merkel 00:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

As does, of course, Israel, who is geographically completely in Asia, but plays in UEFA because of the Arab boycott -- half of their matches in Asia would be politically charged. At one time, interestingly, Israel were a member of the Oceania Football Confederation, again to avoid being in the same confed as all of the Arab countries. --ByeByeBaby 01:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Australia is a Western nation that's geographically part of South-East Asia and also part of Oceania but a contintent in our own right. We're also simultaneously "down under" and "over the top" (about going through to the next round at the 2006 FIFA World Cup). Basically, we don't where the hell we are. But we don't really care, that's what makes us so wonderful. JackofOz 02:24, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Russia is an interresting case. Europe stretches east to the Ural mountains, so the biggest geographical part of Russia is Asian, but most Russians are Europeans. And it's people who play football, not land. :)

Another anomaly is the World series, which is an exclusively US affair, except for one Canadian team.

About politically charged games. Is this taken into consideration when forming groups in the world championship? Since most teams are from Europe and South America there won't be too much of a problem, but some games might still be tricky, especially with the US. Imagine US-Iraq or US-Vietnam. Or matches between former Yugoslavian countries. DirkvdM 07:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there's much animosity between Americans and Vietnamese anymore, and of course the official government of Iraq is a U.S. ally. On the other hand, a U.S.-Iran or U.S.-North Korea match might be an issue. As for the former Yugoslavia, there's certainly been some sporting controversy there. Just look at our article on Srbe na vrbe! Bhumiya (said/done) 10:05, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

krakatoa

what is the nearest town or city near the indonesian volcano krakatoa?

If you go to the article Krakatoa, it has the geographic coordinates for the volcano. The coordinates are hyperlinked; click on them, and it'll take you to a page where you can view the coordinates at a number of map sites. Choose one of those (I used MapQuest) and zoom out until you can see the areas around it. Just eyeballing it, it looks like Cinangka is closest. Chuck 21:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Painting

http://i5.tinypic.com/15clj4k.jpg

My final Quiz Question that i`m stuck on... no-one even has a clue. It apparently depicts the arrival of a famous figuer into a European City. Help is much appreciated.

Just from the appearance, it looks Italian. The problem with that is that the people look French. The flag is red, white, and blue - but top to bottom like the Netherlands' flag. The person arriving is apparently dead. My first guess is that it is a Pope, but it could be any high religious figure. It is certainly Catholic if it is old due to the "Vive Jesus" on the banner on the right. You point out that it is the arrival of a famous figure. The first thing that comes to mind is Saint Nicholas. His remains were returned to Italy after his death and he was often depicted as having a pointy hat and a red robe. Perhaps that will help. Maybe it will lead you off in the complete wrong direction. --Kainaw ^(talk) 23:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

The larger vertical flag seems to be red, blue and yellow, and these colours also feature on the soldiers' caps. Could be set in Romania. JackofOz 00:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Brussels + Christ, And did those feet in ancient times wander round Belgium? MeltBanana 01:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

So that would be red, black and yellow, hung side-ways. They haven't managed to build Jerusalem yet, though, afaik. Would give too much trouble anyway, given the quibbling over the other Jerusalem. DirkvdM 07:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

In case anyone would like to know, Adrian Henri wrote a poem based on it called The Entry of Christ into Liverpool. It's in The Mersey Sound (revised edition). He also did a painting of the same name as a homage to James Ensor. Tyrenius 18:57, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Movies about the Free French Forces

Recently I have watched a couple of French films set during the Vichy regime/German occupation: Lacombe, Lucien and Monsieur Klein. Are there any films relating to the Free French Forces and/or Charles de Gaulle in London? I don't mean documentaries. For example, are there any feature films that depict any of the following:

• Destruction of the French Fleet at Mers-el-Kebir
• Battle of Dakar
• Appeal of June 18 (1940-06-18)
• The Chequers Accord of 1940-08-07
• Normandie-Niemen squadron
• Battle of Bir Hakeim
• De Gaulle arriving in Algeria (1943-05-30)
• Comité français de la Libération nationale (1943-06-03)

--Mathew5000 22:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

• Well, there's a Franco-Russian film entitled Normandie - Niémen; there's a French TV movie entitled Mers El-Kebir. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 22:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I was hoping for films available on DVD in North America. Considering that France has one of the largest filmmaking industries of any country in the world, I would think they would have made some big-budget films about the French Free Forces, and also about Charles de Gaulle and the government in exile during the War. --Mathew5000 03:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

trivia question

The US gave birth to him but what state claims him as their own?

I think you'll have to be a bit more specific on that one; it's far too general, as it could technically apply to any ex-pat American. Ziggurat 22:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

George Washington / Washington--Melburnian 07:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

That's a clever answer, but of course there was no US when GW was born, so this may be a flawed riddle if that's the correct answer. --K

You're right..hmmm...how about Éamon de Valera / Republic of Ireland (The Irish State)?--Melburnian 11:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I doubt it. If it was Eamon surely the question would be "but which country claims him as their own", and that would be pretty dire. I think its Washington. Are there any other states which are named after people born on the North American continent? --84.13.243.110 00:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

June 23

The name "Hickey"

Hi folks. I just did a quick search on Wikipedia on my family name, "Hickey". What I didn't see kind of surprised me. My name is Robert Hickey, which is not important. What is important is the fact that I have been married to now Brigadier Allison Hickey for the last 21 years. Ok, congrats, but that isn't important. What is important is that Allison is a graduate of the first class of women from the Air Force Academy Class of 1980 (maiden name Hilsman). I know, because I was there, I am class of '78. Now, the interesting fact is that she is the first Female Graduate of the Air Force Academy to actually pin on General Officer. Notice, I didn't say she was the first one to be promoted to General Officer, but she is the first one to be promoted and actually pin it on. Her pin on date was November of 2004. Just thought you all might want to know that, in your "Famous Hickey" Wikipedia reference area. Enjoy. Col (Ret) Robert A. Hickey, class of '78

That is probably sufficient for entering into the article. You can do it yourself, you know. If she has gone on to have a truly notable career (standing out above and beyond other officers in the USAF), then she very well could need an article on her. If she's mainly of interest to the wider world for her accomplishment as the first GO, then add her name regularly to the list of famous Hickeys. If she should have an article on her then put two square brackets before and after her name when you add it. Geogre 03:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Identify this clothing accessory

I need help identifying two garment accessories. I see them so often in old comedy films or cartoons but I don't know what they are. What do you call the flaps sticking out at the front and at the back of this guy's neck:

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/9141/shirtfrock4vv.jpg

(The image is a vidcap of Disney's Peter Pan.) --Perfecto 03:27, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

It's a dickey. A kind of faux shirtfront usually worn with a tux.--Anchoress 03:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

From 'hickey' to 'dickey'. I have to ask ... what would a 'lickey' be then? :) DirkvdM 07:16, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

hmm...tricky... Grutness...wha? 09:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Ask mikey. VdSV9•♫ 10:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

You're not taking the mickey, are you? DirkvdM 17:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

We have an article on it at Dickie; didn't we already have this question? Sticky... СПУТНИК^{CCC P} 12:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Do they always flap outwards and upwards when loose from the waistband? Sorry I can't find any picture of it while not being worn. And is that a collar stiffener behind the guy's neck, or is that a part of the vest? --Perfecto 03:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Legal question

If someone posts/trolls on an internet forum, and continues to do so after the forum bans his IP address, is that poster in violation of any US law? For someone with limited legal knowledge it is difficult to judge whether or not a legal threat (Stop or you will go to jail, or stop or we will file a civil suit) is legitimate or just an intimidation tactic. I certainly don't want to violate any law, but if my actions are protected under the first amendment, as I believe they are, I don't want to be intidated out of doing something that is legal. Thanks! Mayor Westfall 12:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Just because something is legal does not mean it is necessarily "right."

I don't care about what your subjective opinion on morality, nor did I ask about it. That's why we have laws, and that is what I am asking about. -Mayor WF

I see how you got banned. DirkvdM 17:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

If you are deliberately attempting to circumvent security measures put up to prevent you from accessing another computer, that can in fact violate the law. However in the case of an internet forum it seems unlikely that such a thing would ever really go to court, and is most likely just an attempt an intimidation. The right to post things on someone else's computer (which is what posting to a website is, in fact) is not protected by the First Amendment anymore than you have the right to write on someone's private chalkboard. --Fastfission 16:28, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

First amendment to what in which country? Anyway, it's an interresting question. If your ip address gets banned it's not strictly you who got banned, is it? And speaking of countries, have they figured out how to deal with the internet yet? It's not bound to any country and can therefore not fall under any country's law, can it? I know this was a big issue a few years back, but I haven't heard of any 'solutions' yet. DirkvdM 17:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure if it has been mentioned here already, but this question has been double posted. You may wish to read the related entry at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous#Legal question before trying to answer it here. Road Wizard 18:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Can someone direct me to a law

There is a new law that bush signed very recently that deals with trolling (or anonomous trolling). Where can I find more information about this law. Does Wiki have an article on it? Thanks Mayor Westfall 13:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Trolling can mean various things. I doubt whether there is a law against any of them, but please elaborate.--Shantavira 14:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I posted on a forum, that claims not to have a [No Member-bashing Policy]--thus members are free to bash each other. A moderator bashed me, I bashed back. I got banned. I made a new account and called out his hypocrocy. I got IP Banned. I used proxy servers to bypass the ban and continued calling him out for being a hypocrite. Then he sent me an ominous legally-sounding email. I cant tell if it's just intimidation or if it is legitimate. I dont think Ive violated any laws...but legal matters are rather complex and I dont have full knowledge of every law...Mayor Westfall 17:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure it isn't an anti-phishing law? Contrary to what most people believe, Congressional laws are VERY easy to find. Go to thomas.loc.gov. In the "Search Bill Text" box, type "phishing" and click on SEARCH. The big trick is remembering that Congress makes laws, not the President. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

This may be an answer to both the above questions. There is, I believe, a US law which makes it illegal for an anonymous person to publish things n the internet "with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person". According to a (generally very unreliable) source this was signed by the President in January 2006. DJ Clayworth 14:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

That must be buried in some other law. All laws signed by Bush from Dec 2005 to present are on http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/L?d109:./list/bd/d109pl.lst:151[1-236](Public_Laws)[[o]]|TOM:/bss/d109query.html (Wiki doesn't like the format of the link, so you have to copy/paste it). --Kainaw ^(talk) 15:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's the one "with intent to annoy..etc" That law seems vauge. how can I tell if it has ever been used and if I am in violation of it? Mayor Westfall 16:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The law you're talking about is this one, specifically this section. It is simply an updating of an old law which prohibited anonymous telephone harassment, and was part of a law regarding violence against women. The actual law itself does not contain the word "annoy"—this was widely misreported. The "annoy" part is in the older law. See this page for some interesting discussion. At worst it means that if you harass someone anonymously, it is legally the same as harassing them under your own name, as I understand it. --Fastfission 16:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Ill-remembered Science-Fiction Short Story

I am being driven slowly mad by a vague memory of a sci-fi short story I read many years ago. It would ha ve been published in one of the monthly sci-fi magazines, possibly Isaac Asimov's Sci-Fi Magazine.

The general plot was of a race of aliens aiming to take over the world, using mind control either by radio or I think through music records. The main thing I remember about the story is that one of the central characters spoke only in quotes from Bruce Springsteen songs.

Does anyone remember this, have a citation, or have I made it up the depths of my fevered imagination? --Worm 13:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Is this what you're thinking of? --Mathew5000 18:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Definately not. ;) It was a published story in a science fiction periodical. --Worm 18:28, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

here is another ill-remembered SF (short) story: A spaceship pilot finds himself on a planet of intelligent plants. They have razon-sharp leaves and an intoxicating smell; the pilot ends up being cut into ribbons and digested by the plants and is enjoying himself immensely in the process. I know it sounds like a stupid plot, but if I remember it right the story had a really haunting quality. Ring any bells? dab (ᛏ) 18:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

QUSETION ABOUT EMO!!!!!11

SO IS LIKE FALL OUT BOY THE FIRST EMO BAND EVERZ?!?!?!?!?! I <3 THOS GUYZZ THE SINGER IS SO SEXXY

K THKZ FOR HELPIN ME OUT

BYE GUYZ LOLZ!!!!!!111

65.26.86.77 14:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Gosh, B1FF is awfully active. Geogre 14:40, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that Emo was the first Emo Band everz. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry that wasn't biff -- 65.26.86.77 16:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

"Emo" pretty much doesn't mean anything, that's the problem. I've heard Galaxie 500 offered as first, and Mission of Burma, and just about anyone who didn't repeat what went before. Since no one knows what makes an "emo" band in the first place, no one can say who the first one was. I wouldn't worry about the label. Geogre 16:37, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

It means emotional rock. Philc _T^E_C^I 21:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but if that's all that it means it includes Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd. As a critical concept, it seems to have no distinctions in tempo, time period, instrumentation, production values, lyrical content, or keys. I always thought that Joy Division and The Cure were very gloomy and mopey, but they're not "emo." I thought that Bauhaus (band) was theatrical and self-consciously artsy, but they're not emo. Galaxie 500 is lo-fi, like a lot of independent acts, but there's nothing particularly that sets them apart from their counterparts, and yet they're "emo," and now "Fallout Boy" is emo? It doesn't seem to have any practical meaning. It's rock 'n roll, and it's either stuff you like or don't. Trying to create armed camps of listeners is a passtime of childhood. I saw the guys of ZZ Top at a Laurie Anderson show. Geogre 02:19, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Well like all genres it has evolved slowly, and through combining with other genres and styles, then some band will take it, go mainstream, and be credited with "inventing" it. Philc _T^E_C^I 22:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

10th Legion Equestris

Hi, I am asking if any of you "Roman military history buffs" can check out when and where the X Legio - 10th Legion Equestris was founded. Don't use Wikipedia please, I have read the article Legio X Gemina but I am simply not convinced. I have also searched in some sites of the internet but I couldn't found something solid. It seems that the current view holds that this legion was founded in 58 BC. However I have found that this is not supported by Julius Caesar's book the "Commentarii de Bello Gallico - the Gallic Wars" (I have a translation by Penguin classics).

The story is the following: Cutting a deal with Pompey and Crassus (the First Triumvirate) Caesar recieves the governship of 3 provinces: Galia cisalpina, Galia Transalpina and Illyria. He also has 4 legions: VII, VIII, IX, and the X (I have confirmed this in the book "In the name of Rome" by Adrian Goldsworthy). The Helvetii are planning a migration. Caesar recruits another two legions: XI and XII (also confirmed by Goldsworthy). I have checked his book and he clearly describes these new legions as "new" and the other four ones as "veteran". So if the X was allready a veteran by this time (58 BC - the same year it is supposed to been have founded !) it is higly unlikely that it was founded recently. This is also hinted by Caesar's ambition: he needs tough veteran legions to conquer something, so what is going to demand from his partners? Reliable veteran legions. I also have a book called "Caesar's Legion" by Stephen Dando-Colins. He wrote that the 10th was founded in 61 BC by Caesar as he begins a campaign against the Lusitanii. However this book is highly disputed, as Dando seems to have made several major mistakes and some critics also say that he invented some stuff. He just might be right on this ocasion, but I want to confirm this. He doesn't really explain how he reaches this date, its seems to be reasonable, but who knows?

I have allready debated this in Talk:Roman Republic. Please take a look if you want.

So what do I really want? I want to find out is why 58 BC is considered the birth date and if there any alternative views. I am quite inclined to present the mater in a fair manner in the article Legio X Gemina. Thanks Flamarande 17:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

History of Russian Architect Buildings

Hi , My name is Sydney and I was wondering what the colored cone-shaped designs on the Russian buildings were called ?

History of Russian Architect Buildings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_architecture heres a picture of what I'm reffering to . St. Basil's Cathedral .

Sincerely , Sydney Thanks for any help .

• Those are onion domes. --Fastfission 19:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Somewhat similar domes can be found on the towers of Catholic churches in southern Germany and Austria, where they are called Zwiebeltürme ("onion towers"). For an example, see Frauendorf (Bad Staffelstein). --Lambiam^Talk 21:23, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Deadwood Season 2 Region 2 DVD Question

I've recently purchased the complete season 2 of Deadwood on region 2 DVD. While I am able to watch the episodes without any problems, I cannot seem to be able to access the additional episode commentaries. I have bought a legitmate copy and the box packaging does advertise the audio commentaries as being available.

I've tried searching for help on the internet without any success. I did find a review (see the link below) which contains a picture of the title menu with Episodes, Langauge & Features as the options. My version only displays Episodes and Subtitles in it's menu. http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=21812

I've tried playing it on my PS2 and using InterWin DVD Player & DVD X Player on my laptop but without any joy. They only show one available audio channel, and don't display any other menu options.

Given the popularity of the show, I would hope that there are plenty of fellow wikipedians who have purchased the same box set, and are possibly suffering from the same problem.

Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Regards, Gallaghp 19:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Things to look out for when establishing a town or village

Hi all. In order to create a believeble world for the characters in a story I'm writing, I would be extremely grateful if anyone could provide me with certain things that surveyors look out for when deciding on the best place to estalish a town or village. Answers covering a wide range of climates and geography would be most helpful. Thank you in advance!

-- Emmanuel Q.

Well, I don't know for sure, but I imagine the biggest architectual/engineering issues are things probably divide into "long term gradual problems" and "short term immediate problems". In the former category you'd have things like erosion (in cases where you have bodies of water or high winds), in long-term stability issues (can the ground support much weight? how does it handle when it is rained upon?), and other things related to the long-term occupation of a given site. In the other category you'd probably have questions relating to the possibility of large natural disasters -- flooding is a major concern (since it is not always rare), but moving upwards into the question of volcanoes, typhoons, rockslides, earthquakes, tornadoes, etc. depending on where you happen to be. --Fastfission 19:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

You don't say what level of development or technology your characters have, but surely there are some very basic considerations like water -- a stream, a river, a lake, whatever. Other natural resources to provide for food, fuel, building materials as necessary. Also perhaps a vantage point in order to see approaching enemies or predators from many/all directions. Natural shelter that can be used until more permanent structures can be built.

And of course, high speed wireless internet access  ;-) --LarryMac 20:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, considering most villages were founded in mediaeval times or earlier, reasons include, high ground for defense, water, woods for hunting and trees for building with, south facing hill for crops (in northern hemisphere), crossing junction in trade routes or a natural resource of some kind. Philc _T^E_C^I 21:40, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I just developed a world design for what looks like a series of pieces, and put a lot of thought into the location of the various settlements. Basically, a village will often start where there's water, good soil for farming, forests for building materials (or good sod, for plains locales), and routes that can be used for trade. If your setting is more advanced (into the Medieval-style eras, say), chances are this could be refined to include places that are dependent on trade - mining villages, for example, which might not produce their own food, but have raw minerals that are traded for those basic supplies. And it seems a town will spring up anywhere a large tributary runs into a river, or two rivers fork... just because, near as I can tell. =) Tony Fox (speak) 22:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Ahh yes, and bridging points, mountain passes, or any place people are forced to travel through to get to somewhere else. Philc _T^E_C^I 01:20, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Agree with all of that, but by the Middle Ages in populous countries such as England there were already villages all over anyway (1 per 4 sq miles, say) so there wasnt really much room for new ones - any new village from that period would have had to be on the worst land, which had been ignored up to then. Jameswilson 22:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

It depends on what era and location you are talking about.

In North America, some townsites were often chosen due to access to a waterway that could support a mill. Later on, townsites were sometimes chosen to take advantage of preexisting infrastructure, such as roads, canals and railways. -- Mwalcoff 23:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

If the place that you are establishing this village will compliament and not interfere with the plot of the story you are writing. Russian F 16:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Chief Parker L.A.P.D.

Where did chief parker go to law school? The xxxxx (WP:NPA) at the lapd historical divison know but they will not tell me unless I PAY! them $ for research fees! My mom and my rabbi will not allow this. I suspect its UCLA but being only functionaly omnipotent I aint sure. (Book em Danno!-Just the facts ma'm.) 24.0.47.184 21:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)(Hobgoblin)

24.0.47.184 (talk · contribs) added. --hydnjo talk 22:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

List of phrases which mean to die

Where can I find a list of phrases that mean to die such as "kick the bucket" or "meet his maker" etc.?

Well, I found this one via Google that seems to have quite a few. Hope it helps.[1]--inks^T 23:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

This question has been double posted. See the related section at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous#List of phrases which mean to die. Road Wizard 00:30, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

June 24

history

what lay at the core of new Spain's economy and social development?

Do you mean the Spanish colonies in the Americas ? If so, exploiting the natives by stealing all their wealth (mainly in the form of gold and silver), then importing black slaves to continue mining (once all the natives had been killed off) seemed to be their main method. StuRat 02:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow, strongly emotional answer, though little illustrative. GTubio 09:51, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

How is it "not illustrative" ? StuRat 21:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

See illustration. GTubio 22:24, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

That's hardly 'new'. More likely the end of the rule of Franco. Anyway, sounds like a homework question. DirkvdM 05:57, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the questioner is literally asking about New Spain, not "new Spain". Am I correct, questioner? Anyway, it seems like a valid question to me. Originally, the Spanish colonies were useful largely for the plunder they yielded. Later, they would have been parceled out into agricultural estates. As StuRat says, slave labor and precious metals were the primary resources. However, New Spain was ultimately a failure as a financial investment, with Spain losing most of the money due to piracy and military entanglements. As for "social developments", I suggest that the questioner check out our article on the encomienda system. Bhumiya (said/done) 10:31, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah, one is never too young to learn! I could use the excuse that the questioneer should have capitalised the 'N', but the truth is I never heard of the term and interpreted it literally. DirkvdM 17:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

No harm done, DirkdvM. I was momentarily confused as well. If I hadn't known what New Spain was, I would have probably responded as you did. Bhumiya (said/done) 01:10, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

War

With this recent situation with North Korea and testing it's Taepodong 2 missile, it's difficult to tell what news and viewpoints are accurate - it's hard to tell what could actually happen. Suppose this test ban goes ahead...what are the chances of it leading to...

1. The United States going to war with North Korea. 2. A conflict between the United States and China. 3. A nuclear war.

Kind of a worrisome situation. Looking through history it seems that wars can suddenly explode out of nothing, and considering the buildup of tensions and breakdown of the six-party talks...it seems possible that something very bad could happen as a result of all this. Could be just paranoia on my part though. What do you think? --Shadarian 02:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, in my opinion 1 is highly unlikely, because of the fear of 2 and 3, not to mention the likely possibility of a substantial fraction of the citizens of Seoul, and the American soldiers garrisoned in the South, being killed in the vent of option 1. North Korea and its political leadership are often mischaracterised in the foriegn media. They are not particularly nice people, to say the least. But they are, at some level, quite rational, or they wouldn't have remained in charge for the past 50 years. All the evidence suggests that their primary goal is to remain in charge of North Korea, and their actions are directed entirely to that end. Actually going to war with other countries is highly undesirable to them, because it would almost certainly result in the end of their regime, one way or the other. So their military strategy involves making sure that attacking them will cause unacceptable losses. --Robert Merkel 03:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

2, the conflict between the US and China is unlikely. China has publicaly asked North Korea not to test the missle (actually, it's been a bit stronger than "asked"). The major fears involved in a potential attack on North Korea are the nuclear war and the US's inability to field the necessary troups without withdrawing from Iraq. Emmett5 04:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Right, that's what I thought. What makes you think 2. might happen? Do China and North Korea have some kind of war-treaty? DirkvdM 05:55, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Um, you are familiar with the history of the Korean War, aren't you? One of the major reasons China props up the NK regime (and continues to do so) is because they don't want US troops sitting on their borders, which might be the end result of the collapse of North Korea. --Robert Merkel 08:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree heartily with Robert Merkel's above assessment of North Korea. This Taepodong 2 seems to be a publicity stunt, albeit a very bold and menacing one. If the political climate in the U.S. were different, the Bush administration could quite easily use this missile program as a pretext for an invasion. But with his approval ratings languishing below 35% and the military already perilously overextended, I don't think the U.S. is up for another war anytime soon. Maybe after 2008. To answer question 2, I honestly don't think China would even consider intervening in the event of a US-DPRK war. The global balance of power is very different from 1950. For one thing, China's borders are secure and it enjoys almost universal diplomatic recognition. Nobody's gonna be invading China, even if they take sides in the dispute. All issues with China will be solved diplomatically. If the U.S. attempted to wage war on China, the U.S. would find itself at the mercy of the largest army in the world by far. And if it were an unprovoked war, they would find themselves totally isolated and quite possibly in danger of invasion. To answer question 3, I doubt any existing government, however desperate, would consider a nuclear attack except as a response to an earlier nuclear attack. Even in a hopeless situation, a nuclear attack would be useless and would only provoke greater ferocity from the attackers and a longer occupation after the war. Bhumiya (said/done) 11:21, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Isn't the U.S. the one with the largest army, if we're strictly talking about dollars spent (which translates into a material advantage)? Anyways, too many businesspeople would complain about a U.S.-China war and then the citizenry would complain as the prices of their goods skyrocket. There's more likely to be a provocation over Taiwan independence (which is a lot of sabre-rattling), not NK aggression. --ColourBurst 19:21, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Even the most optimistic estimates for the range of the TD-2 don't make it a useful first-strike weapon. Most don't even make it a useful second-strike weapon. See this graphic for an example of this -- you'd have to think the weapon was going to have a range of 10,000 km to get near the contiguous U.S. On top of that, there really isn't any good evidence that the North Koreans have a working bomb prototype, much less one which could fit on the end of a missile. So the only way to get into a nuclear war in this situation would be between the U.S. and China, and I don't see that happening. --Fastfission 17:41, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

4. China gets pissed at babysitting the North Koreans and invade, giving South Korea the undesirable task of bringing North Korean back to level. -- Миборовский 00:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I see some very different, but still very bad, results:

Japan judges correctly that the US can't be counted on to defend them from aggression by North Korea, since that would expose the US to a potential nuclear strike on the West Coast. Therefore, Japan scraps it's pacifist Constitution and rearms, including the devlopment of nuclear weapons. South Korea does the same. Taiwan follows, although for protection from China, but using the excuse that "everyone else in Asia has nukes, why shouldn't we". This spread of nuclear weapons then eventually leads to a nuclear war. 22:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Help Finding Songs

My father is in search of four songs that are on one collection. He used to listen to them on tape before CDs. The songs were called Brennan on the Moor, Hot Asphalt, Finnegan's Wake, and The One-Eyed Riley. After some googling, we located the musicians Steve Benbow and The Strawberry Hill Boys. In a CD called "Songs Of Ireland," all three songs excluding the song The One-Eyed Riley were on it. I am having a hard time locating The One-Eyed Riley with the others on CD. They are all old Irish songs that at one time was on a compilation together. If anyone knows of a CD with all four songs together, even under different musicians, my father and I would be grateful, because that would have been the music he remembers. Thank you so much to anyone who can provide any help or even a clue as to where I should start looking. M@$+@ Ju ~ ♠ 03:25, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I searched around on The All Music Guide, but from what I saw, the chances of getting all four of those songs on one CD is minuscule. The One-Eyed Riley showed up on four releases, but it's not clear whether any of them are currently in print. I'd check around at any place that might sell used CDs and try my luck that way. --LarryMac 04:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help, you're probably right about it being out of print. I still consider this a success, because we are getting a CD with three of the songs, and I can tell my dad its the best we could have hoped for. Thanks! M@$+@ Ju ~ ♠ 16:31, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Baptist Wedding

Hello.. I was just wondering does any one know wat happens in a baptist wedding and the symbolism involved...Thank You

I would suppose the bride and groom are thrown a bucket at and then definitely splashed in the swimming pool ? Any advice ? --DLL 09:50, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I suppose I've been to a Baptist wedding, in that both participants were observant Baptists. It was low-key, very formal, but not "ritualistic", so to speak. I don't know what the questioner means by symbolism. There was a small chapel. Two rows of seats. An aisle. Music came on. Bride in a white dress. Bridesmaids in banana-colored dresses. The bride's sister read a poem. The pastor stepped up and read a verse (1 Corinthians 13:4 or something similar), and then made some brief remarks. Vows. Ring swap. Kiss. Reception. That's about the size of it. Oh, and once I attended another wedding of two Baptists that took place on a yacht. So there's a lot of flexibility. Bhumiya (said/done) 10:58, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Baptists are a congregational church, so they have no set doctrine. Therefore, there isn't any one thing that would be a "baptist" wedding. Each congregation enjoys wide lattitude. Generally, Baptists are among the most stridently anti-Catholic of the protestant churches, and so they are strongly anti-liturgical and against what the early Independents called "pomp" and "ceremony." The marriage rite is generally the same as is used in all western Christian churches, but symbolism will be kept to a bare minimum. Thus, it is more notable by what isn't employed than what is. Otherwise, no two baptist church marriages will be identical. Geogre 02:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Strongly suggest Wikipedia creats a new section in the reference desk----Law and e-business

The emerging flourishing e-business undoubtedly need new law systems to be set up, and as a reference desk for Wikipedia, I think it is very important to create a new section to solely collect the laws relating to the e-business. In addition, I strongly suggest the editors of Wikipedia try their best to invite the experts, the professors in legislation area from both academic and industrial field to contribut in this section and share their latest knowledge with us. In addition, case studies should also be included in this section. Thank you. (Preceding unsigned comment by User:Korenzhang2244. Please sign posts using ~~~~)

All it would say to every queation is, If you want help with law, see a lawyer, as that is the policy. Philc _T^E_C^I 10:17, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

--do you think it is possible to see a lawyer just for a trivial thing?koren 15:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

There are (at least) two major problems with this idea. One is that laws vary enormously from one country to another, and this is a global resource.

--so that means it will be more important to give poeple from different countries the opportunity to communicate, to discuss, especially it is becoming more and more globalised.koren 15:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The other is that the law is incredibly complicated

--not particular agree, law is made by humans, and nothing is too complicated to express clearly and simply on the internet. If it cannot express clearly to let people understand, the law itself will need to be verified. koren 15:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

and requires expert knowledge.

--agree to some extend but jsut like encyclopedia, it should be unstandable using simply language.koren 15:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia is a complete free-for-all,

--you are right in this point here.koren 15:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

with some very odd characters and opinions in the mix,

--talking yourself? If you are among the normal people, you should know how to communicate with others on the internet.koren 15:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

expecting any reliable legal (or medical etc) advice from here is foolish to say the least.--Shantavira 11:41, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

--I suppose it is the one who are saying this is actually foolish and need to see a doctor.koren 15:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, e-business related law is a very specific subject, and most sections of the Reference Desk are much more general. Several sections get over a dozen questions per day, while even the relatively small Language desk gets four or five questions daily. It's extremely unlikely that an e-business/law section would get even one or two posts per day. Most of the content that you suggest would be better suited to articles; for example, we already have a category on Computer Law. If you still think that the Reference Desk needs a new section, a better place to suggest it would be on its talk page. --Cadaeib (talk) 17:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

• Wikipedia does not provide legal advice and even if someone comments you should still see a lawyer for the most accurate answer. As for e-business questions. Anyone who has a business and asks Wikipedia for help shouldn't be in their business to begin with. Running a business requires knowledge of your own, or at least the knowledge where to recruit experts to work for you. -Mgm|^(talk) 07:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I'm Spelling it right.

I heard this term used and cannot find a definition for it or a reference, nichean or nichian the pronunciation was (knee-chee-an). I'd like to know what this is. I couldn't get a clear understanding by way of context of the conversation.

The term is "Nietzschean" and it refers to the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. Bhumiya (said/done) 11:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

In its adjectival form, it's generally a reference to Social Darwinism. Geogre 12:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I could imagine that, although I've always used it to refer specifically to Nietzsche and his philosophy. Some people use it to refer to any sort of extreme, polemical inversion of accepted mores, often (but not always) in a negative context. Bhumiya (said/done) 00:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

True. Among philosophers and trained folks, it would refer only to things like Nietzsche and his form of the dialectic of will. I suppose that some people might use it to refer to socially shocking and anti-ethical statements, like "pity is a slave morality." When it creeps into the mundane, though, I have most often heard it as a vague Will to Power/Man and Superman reference. (I just had to explain the ubermensch to a class reading a Vonnegut story. They thought I was crazy.) Geogre 02:53, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

WWII

I recently saw an advert for a documentary which stated

"World War II did not begin in Poland in 1939, but two years earlier, in China, 1937, and only one country could have prevented it, Britain"

What event is this reffering too, could someone direct me to the relevant article aswell. Thank you. Philc _T^E_C^I 14:13, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Second Sino-Japanese War --Mathew5000 15:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

It could also be argued that WW2 started in 1936 with Hitler's and Mussolini's support for the fascist Franco during the Spanish Civil War, which allowed him to win, since an equal level of support was not provided by the Allies. StuRat 15:30, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

But Spain was never in the war (officially). But there was already a war between the Chinese and the Japanese when the invasion of Poland occurred. When Germany and Japan became allies it became a wider war and it's really rather Eurocentric to consider the start of the European part of it the start of the war. Only recently have I learned that the real big players in WWII were China and Russia, not Germany and the US, as I grew up to believe. If you go by the death toll, that is. Over half the deaths were Russian and Chinese. DirkvdM 17:55, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

If you judge the effect of war on a country solely by the number killed, then virtually every war involving a country with a huge population like China is "of major significance", while even if the entire population of Luxembourg was wiped out, the war would still be "insignificant", due to the low population of that country. Thus, that's not a good way to decide things. Also, being on the losing side often assures you have a higher percentage of casualties. Should we conclude that only the losing sides are significantly involved in wars ? StuRat 15:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

As for the Spanish Civil War, it set many precedents for WW2, from the failure of the Allies to oppose fascist aggression, to the aerial bombing of civilian populations, to widespread executions of noncombatants and prisoners of war. Allied action to defeat Franco likely would have convinced Hitler not to invade Czechoslovakia and Poland, and at least would have avoided the European portion of WW2. StuRat 15:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

The most generally accepted date for when WW2 began is the German invasion of Poland. Russian F 00:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

In China, it is generally accepted that WW2 began in 1937. Bwithh 05:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Just another example of how where you grow up determines what version of the truth you get to hear. Another example was the notion I had that by putting a man on the Moon the US had won the space race. As a kid you just accept this sort of info. But it's complete nonsense if you look at the firsts the USSR had achieved before that - spacecraft, man in space, spacewalk, Moonlanding and landing on another planet, to name but a few. And the two big ones: the first photographs of the other side of the Moon and the surface of Venus, two places we can't see from here.

The point I'm trying to make here is that you should be very suspicious about what you hear. Don't get paranoid, but in stead of blindly accepting other people's interpretations, try to find the basic data and draw your own conclusions. DirkvdM 06:48, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

It would seem to me that a "World War" would only begin when pretty much every significant power in the world was at war (aside from the decidedly neutral countries). China and Japan may have been at war in 1937, but most of the rest of the world wasn't. Two powers at war with each other doesn't seem to me to be much of a "World War". However once Germany invaded Poland, at least several dozen important powers became actively engaged in war, in almost every area of the globe. Only then, I would say, did the second World War begin. Loomis 20:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

There's a lot of sense in what you say, but a Chinese person might argue "it was the same war; it became 'world' when other major powers joined in, but the war itself started in 1937". DJ Clayworth 15:30, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

In that case, a Balkan would argue that the First World War was simply an extension of the ongoing Balkan Wars that began in 1912. Indeed, even those who accept the traditional 1914-1918 timeline for WWI would agree that the First World War began in the Balkans, with the assasination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand of Austria in Sarajevo. So to a Balkan, WWI began in 1912. However, the world was clearly not at war until at least June 1914. Loomis 20:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how the Limeys could have stopped the Second Sino-Japanese War. We wouldn't have let them. -- Миборовский 00:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Who's "we"? GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 14:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

The Russians, judging by his signature. DirkvdM 18:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

The Chinese. -- Миборовский 21:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Mailbox Rule (in contract law)

I was reading the article mailbox rule and I was wondering, what happens if something in the contract contradicts the mailbox rule? For example what if the contract says that it goes into effect X number of days after it was mailed?--Anakata 15:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The mailbox rule isn't a rule about when the contract goes into effect, it is a rule about when an acceptance has taken place. If you make me an offer, and I accept, the acceptance is effective when I mail it. So, if you retract the offer between when I sent the acceptance and your receipt of it, it is too late. The contract itself can, however, dictate what constitutes acceptance. (Cj67 16:15, 24 June 2006 (UTC))

But doesn't the signing of a contract constitute acceptance? What I mean is that if the signing of a contract constitutes acceptance, then the contract going into effect would be when the acceptance takes place.--Anakata 17:45, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

No, signing isn't enough, the person who made the offer must, of course, be notified that there is a contract. (Cj67 18:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC))

June 25

Underground Fugitive who lived On East Pearl Street in Torrington CT in 1974.

Dear Wikipedia:

Several years ago, while reading the local newspaper, I noticed an article that a member of the underground lived on East Pearl Street in Torrington, CT (summer months only) in 1974. The article said the fugitive's name, but I cant recall it, nor did I save the article. Do you have the fugitives name??????

Are you thinking of the Underground Railroad? It predates 1974 considerably. See this link. --Mathew5000 05:57, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

A railroad fugitive? Common, trains aren't that bad. :) I think he means a WWII underground member. DirkvdM 06:51, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

• Sounds more like an anti war protester/Weatherman type to me considering the date.Being an old radical/hippy it was the first thing that occurred to me--hotclaws(217.39.11.210 07:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC))

I agree with hotclaws. The question certainly is about a member of one of the following groups, or an equivalent group: Weatherman (organization), Revolutionary Youth Movement, Symbionese Liberation Army, Black Panther Party.-gadfium 08:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Probably thinking of Ira Einhorn, although that's a guess. He was very much wanted for murder. He had been a Weather member, but the murder charges were for killing his girlfriend. He lived in New England and fled to Europe, where he was caught, eventually (around 1998-1999). I'm giving all this extra detail because it's likely that, as usual, I've misspelled or misremembered the name slightly. Geogre 13:19, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Or Kathy Boudin, or Katherine Anne Power? - Nunh-huh 17:09, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

What is the average number of friendships that a human will have in their life-time

Hi, I am organising an event which addresses the effect of HIV/AIDS and I am trying to illustrate the problem by relating the number of deaths each year to the number of friendships that an average human would have in their lifetime and I can't seem to find it anywhere. So the question is - 'what is the average number of friendships that a human will have in their lifetime from birth to death'. I also would need to know where these statistics are sourced from if possible. thanks - really appreciate anyone's assistance, Sarah A ....

I don't see how the number of friends somebody has relates to the problem of AIDS. In any case, how would you define "friend"? There are lots of different kinds of friendship. Do you mean number of sexual partners? That would be more relevant, but would vary enormously depending on your particular country and culture. Where are you from? --Shantavira 12:24, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Me neither, unless you're talking about Friends with benefits. --mboverload@ 12:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think he's trying to make a connection. He's just looking for a number to compare the number of deaths to. How about he makes it into "Each year x people die of HIV/AIDS. That's about as much as the entire population of country X." That should have the required impact. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Or maybe the poster is going to say something like 'Statistically 10 of your friends will die due to AIDS, please help this worthy cause and help a friend'? And sorry I don't know the answer to your question --iamajpeg 20:24, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

The answer would vary extremely heavily since there is little justification and proper definition to what you mean by friend. Casual friends, "school" friends, close friends, ... what is truly considered a friend? --Proficient 03:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It's Sarah again...I am a girl (as a by-the-way) - thanks for your feedback so far. What I'm trying to do is state something along the following lines - "currently there are 880,000 children affected by HIV/AIDS in Uganda"....on average in our life-time we will make "x" amount of friends....now, there are 300 people in this room tonight. I want you all to close your eyes and remember the first memory you had....keep thinking and now visualise primary school and friends you made in primary school, secondary school, university, and any friends you have made in various jobs you have had thus far in your life....all those people - multiply it by the 300 people here tonight and that wouldn't even cover "x"% of the children currently affected by HIV/AIDS in Uganda alone....... - I need something along those lines. It needs to be catchy and make people look seriously about the huge problem in Africa. Hopefully someone somewhere that has perhaps studied sociology or statistics in combination with this would possibly know the answer....thanks again, Sarah A (from Australia)

Because of the number of variables, the number would be so nebulous that you'd be better off just making up a plausible-sounding answer. No-one's going to dispute it. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 14:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

There are better ways to help people understand the scale of Africa's struggle with HIV/AIDS. The charities working in the field usually prefer to concentrate on the positives, which thereby illuminate the negatives, without leaving the audience feeling that it's a situation that cannot be overcome. It's particularly useful to focus on the extraordinary successes Uganda has had in turning round one of the worst AIDS problems in Africa, through some straight-talking policies cleverly designed to gain the backing of both Christian and Islamic clerics.

I suggest you take a look at some N.G.O. websites for more info. There's a particularly good British one called International Care & Relief that works on a community level and has had terrific success. Their website is [2] --Dweller 22:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

major revisions complete

The Half-life computation article has undergone substantial revision which has hopefully addressed everyone's concerns. If you have any further comments after looking at the article again, please list the items you do not like, make whatever comment you have and please be specific and allow time for further revision. If there is any reason I can not comply with your wishes then I will let you know the reason why. ...IMHO (Talk) 12:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Then why is the link red ? StuRat 16:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

AFD said so. DMacks 01:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Caesar crossing the Rubicon

Did Ceaser cross the Rubicon going north into Gaul, or South into Italy?

Presumably both, but it was only a problem coming back south into Italy - generals were not allowed to lead an army into Italy. Adam Bishop 16:41, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Try Rubicon, Caesar was returning from the Gallic Wars. The Senate and Pompey were planning to get rid of him and ordered him to disband his legions and to return to Italy to face trial. Caesar choose to fight and to rebel, instead of meekly surrendering. Thereby he started a civil war. Flamarande 16:44, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

humantities

I need to compare and contrast the description of the 'afterlife' in the underworld in Homer's Odyssey and Vergil's Aaneid

Please, do your own homework. You can also consult the articles Odyssey and Aeneid for some details. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 18:54, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting mixed between Half afterlife and After half-life. --DLL 19:23, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Do your own homework. Our article on Hades might help you with an overview, but you won't do yourself any favors by trying to find a compare/contrast already done for you. Geogre 20:50, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

There's actually a rather decent article on humantities. Loomis 23:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

FDR meets JFK

Is there any historical record that these two Presidents ever met? Perhaps Joseph Kennedy once took his large family to the White House to meet President Roosevelt. 66.213.33.2 19:24, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know: no. I've been to the John F. Kennedy Library library numerous times, and the only suggestion of a president meeting a future president was with Clinton meeting JFK as a youth leader thing. Yanksox ^(talk) 04:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

That must make presidential debates pretty difficult... GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 14:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC) 14:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Please make your header intelligible to people from outsaide the US. Many might know (if they think a bit) what 'JFK' stands for, but hardly anyone will know 'FDR'. Cheers. DirkvdM 11:39, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Presumably George W. Bush also met George H. W. Bush at some point too. AllanHainey 12:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

And Ike reportedly met Tricky Dick (and so did JFK). Hey, I've got an idea. Why don't we start a List of U.S. presidents who met each other? --Lambiam^Talk 16:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It would seem that all US presidents, in recent history at least, have met with their immediate successor, as they're generally forced to suffer the indignity of getting a front row seat at their successor's inauguration. Even those who've died in office, like JFK and FDR surely met their successors, as they chose them to be their VPs. As well, even those who completed two full terms in office, such as Clinton, Reagan and Eisenhower would still meet their successors at the inauguration ceremony, even without having had debated them.

As for presidents who've met not simply their immediate successor, but a president that would take office some time later, I'm sure FDR met Eisenhower, as Eisenhower was a major general in WWII during FDR's administration. Likewise, Ford certainly met with Reagan (in the '76 primaries) as well as Bush Sr. (as his head of the CIA). It's also extremely likely that Reagan met with Bush Jr. as early as 1981, if not earlier, being the son of his VP. I only hope and pray we won't have a new category: Presidents who were married to future presidents! Loomis 19:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, it appears my comment was taken out of context. I meant to say evidence that existed within the JFK library. Yanksox ^(talk) 20:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC) They almost certainly met Joe Kennedy was a leader in FDR's party, and he involved his sons in his political work. In adddition, early in WWII JFK was stationed in DC and served in intelligence

charcoal portrait: artist/subject unknown

First of all, I just want to say thank you ahead of time for any and all help you can give. I was willed a portrait this past month and I haven't a clue how to identify the artist or the subject. Yes, I know a picture would be great, but the dig. cam crashed, so I'm sorry for that. It is about 16" x 20" and looks to be done on parchment. The subject is a young caucasian man in his early to mid twenties wearing a dress shirt and tie. The portraitlooks to be done in charcoal. At the bottom of the picture, it has the capial letter H and just below that and to the right is a dash and 25 (-25). I think it could be the year maybe? However, on the back it has a label that says: R. Paul Palm. Under this, it has "Glasmester Kunstglasfabrik". Then under that it says "Glashandel" with "en gros en detail" and then "Bergen" at the bottom of the label. I have looked through every link between the US and Norway, even as far as to contact the University of Bergen in Europe, but to no avail. I can't seem to find out what the words are, nor anything pertaining to anyone by that name. Please, if anyone knows anything about this portrait, the words, artist, or subject, I would be most grateful. Thanks again, veggielover 19:43, 25 June 2006 (UTC)Dee

Why do you assume it is Norwegian? Using Babelfish:

• Glasmester (Dutch) "For the"
• Kunstglasfabrik (German) "Glass Factory"
• Glashandel (German) "Glass Trade"
• En gros/En Detail (Dutch/German) And gross (quantity) and detail
• Bergen (Dutch) To Store, (German) Mountains

Since Babelfish doesn't have Norwegian, I can't tell if these are words shared by both languages. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but Glasmester does not occur in an extensive and authoritative Dutch dictionary. It can be Danish, Swedish or Norwegian and then means something like "master glass maker". It could mean some glass factory is named "Master Glass Maker", or be telegram style for "master glass maker at the glass factory". While Glashandel can mean "glass trade", the most likely meaning here is something like "glass dealer". This is affirmed by the next line, which says "wholesale – retail". Summing up, we see:

R. Paul Palm

Master glass maker Glass factory

Glass dealer

wholesale – retail

Bergen

My best guess is this is from Norway. If the label is printed, it probably only identifies the seller or distributor of the work. Could it be a lithograph? --Lambiam^Talk 21:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

My assumption is that the questioner assumed Bergen was in Norway, which led to the assumption that it was written in Norwegian. However, there is a Bergen in Germany (more than one I think), in the Netherlands, in Belgium, and in the United States. So, I was wondering if there was another reason to assume it was Norwegian. As for my translations - I blame Babelfish for any mistranslations. I only know English and Chinese well. --Kainaw ^(talk) 21:40, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you sir for the information you provided me with. I'm very grateful of your comments and translations as well. As for the reason I suspected that it was Norwegian, I searched for any and all information in the USA about the subjet in consideration, and it sure didn't fit New Jersey. When I did a deep search, I kept coming up with Bergen, Norway. Since I'm not a skilled linguist, I did make assumptions, that, at this point, seem correct. I really appreciate all the help you have given me. Thanks again, but I will still be searching for the unknown gentelman whom I now have a portrait of. If you have anymore ideas, or information please do not hesitate to relate any and all thoughts you might have. With sincere appreciation, veggieloverDee 02:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Kunstglasfabrikk in Norwegian means "Decorative Glass Factory", producing for example vases, drinking glasses etc. (as opposed to window glass/industrial glass). Glasmester means "master glass maker". "Mester" is a common handworker title in Norway, cf: Byggmester = Master builder). Glashandel means "shop or outlet selling glass". (cf: Bokhandel which means "bookshop"). Bergen is on the west coast of Norway. Would definitely say this is from Norway. JBL

Thank you JBL for the information. I, however am still trying to find out about the young man in the portrait I have. I don't know if he could be the one refered to as R.Paul Palm, all I know is I have no idea how to find out. Any ideas yourself? It would be wonderful if anyone could give me an area, or idea on how to find any informayion on this unknown person. Thanks again to everyone that has had any input on this subject. The young man still remains an "unknown person" to my family. Once again, thanks to you all. veggieloverDee 23:50, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

maggot?

Is the word "maggot" a legitimate term for misogynists (as it states in the article maggot, or is someone just trying to make a political statement (which does not belong in Wikipedia)? Mo-Al 23:50, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Probably only in the same way that "male chauvanist pigs" is, but I'm not sure. I'd say, delete it and post an explanation on the talk page. Emmett5 01:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like vandalism to me. Unless they have attestation for it, it should be removed. I've certainly never heard it associated that way in American English. Geogre 04:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

maggot is also the name of a slipknot fan. the slipknot fans are called maggot. the term was atribuited by joey jordison

How Educational Is The Da Vinci Code

At dinner the other day, the topic of The Da Vinci Code came up, and someone commented on how educational it is. I've read however some aspects such as the cryptex although presented as fact are actually ficticious, just made up for the story to work. This makes me wonder how seriously I should take what I read in this book? Obviously it's not all fiction (the Mona Lisa really is in the Salle de etats(sp)) --Username132 (talk) 00:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Lots of it is false. I found myself frequently pointing out errors in the book. For example, the dead sea scrolls aren't gospels. Also, the claim that yud-hey-vav-hey (the tetragrammaton) is derived from the Hebrew words Yah (another name for God) and Chava (Eve) is obviously false to anyone who actually speaks Hebrew (if it was true, the tetragrammaton would be יהחוה). Mo-Al 01:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Dan Brown in my opinion isn't really all that accurate in his writings, he's not about that. To a certain extent almost all fiction authors (especially genre fiction authors) are probably inaccurate, as they don't usually study their researched field for a living, but some do less research than others. --ColourBurst 01:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

People just take it too seriousely - it is a work of fiction after all (although IMHO Dan Brown takes it a little too seriousely too). Mo-Al 01:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

See Criticisms of The Da Vinci Code for innacuracies. Mo-Al 01:40, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Just take it lightheartedly. --Proficient 03:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I would actually say that the comment is entirely misdirected. Because Dan Brown is pursuing a wild and wholly disproven conspiracy theory, and because he basis his work on Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which was based on a hoax that took in the authors, and because he has made a believer of himself, the book is actually anti-educational. It misinforms because it passes off large chunks of nuttery with sprinklings of truth. To me, that's worse than setting the novel on Mars. If it were set on Mars, readers would know that there might be a little science with the fiction, but setting it among the poor old Templars catches people off balance and preys upon ignorance (not least Dan Brown's own). Geogre 04:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, apart from having plot holes you could fit several Knights Templar in, I have to admit I found the Da Vinci Code quite entertainig for a couple of hours - the problems only start when people actually start believing there's any truth to the story. I'm still not quite sure why so many people insist on believing any historical truth in Brown's books (well, he himself seems to believe that, but that shouldn't be a reason for every reader to also believe it) - I also enjoyed Robert Anton Wilson's books, Eco's Foucault's Pendulum and the Neal Stephenson novels which all deal with a broadly similar subject matter, and as far as I can remember, none of those novels has sparked any noticeable amount of "Oh my gosh, it's all true"-reactions -- Ferkelparade π 08:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Foucault's Pendulum is pretty much an exemplar of how to do it right, IMO. The characters are historians who know (and tell the readers) the difference between history and fiction. Of course there is more going on than that, and Eco's interest in semiotics and reader response suggest more profound doubts about truth (and all kinds of other easter eggs for people who've read too much). Stephenson's Baroque Cycle is interesting to me, because he's so absolutely accurate in his topography and political detail that I've had to reassure myself that his fictional characters are fictional, and I spend my time studying 18th century England. He could misinform, especially about Newton and Leibniz, whose real life motives don't much resemble his fictional ones, but the damage done would be just one speculation on a matter unknown. That's different from Brown's rewriting of the known for the titilating. (Poor old Templars.) Geogre 12:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, of course - Stephenson and Eco are much better authors than Brown, and of course they use their conspiracy theory-inspired backdrops to actually tell a story worth telling, not just for cheap thrills. What I meant was that nobody (well, nobody except a number of nutjobs probably) started to seriously look for evidence of an Illuminati conspiracy after Wilson's books were released, and nobody was looking for an actual conspiracy of Fedex and Nike after reading Interface - my point being that I don't really understand all the press Dan Brown is getting for a story that is neither original nor exactly well researched (although mildly entertaining) -- Ferkelparade π 13:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I have to wonder who actually believes any novel to be truth? I know that my aunt was certain that I was an idiot when I told her that Forrest Gump was not based on a real person. She is the type of person who would believe something as crazy as The DaVinci Code. But, she also believes that the calendar in the stable when Jesus was born was marked December 25th (and I'm sure she is certain that there was a lit tree in the corner with a little electric train going around it). All in all, who cares what she believes. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence would question a whacked conspiracy theory. So, what is the point of getting all upset about those who lack the mental capacity to question what they read? --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

The reason it matters is because Brown deals with matters that are central to one of the world's great religions and because the chaffe he throws up is all having to do with medieval European history. Given that most people haven't the vaguest idea who Jacques de Molay was, they can get confused. When some true things are there and numerous nonsensical things, it gets harder and harder for the casual reader to know what's what. This is made worse by Brown claiming, in the novel, that it's all true, and that is made worse still by Brown saying in an Oprah interview that "all of the facts and secret rituals...that's all 100% true." In other words, the narrative voice says that this is real history (and then some small bits of real history are there), and the writer says that it's real history, and yet the purpose of the fiction is to say something so mind bogglingly outrageous about Christianity as to be offensive intellectually as well as morally. It's the difference between casual confusion and deliberate deceit. More folks are vulnerable than you suppose. Look at all the new interest in Da Vinci's "woman" in The Last Supper, the new interest in the Magdalene, etc. People are falling for it like the proverbial lemmings falling off a cliff. That's why people might care. History and religion are alike getting muddied by someone setting out to persuade to error. Geogre 01:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Dan Brown is the Antichrist and is trying to destroy Christianity with a book in the fiction section. Thanks for clearing that up for me. --mboverload@ 02:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

No, Dan Brown is a knave. "When a man's reason gets astride his reason, and common sense is kick'd out of doors, the first convert he makes is himself," as Swift said. Dan Brown started out a fool and moved on to a knave. There is no "antichrist," except "antichrist of wit": It's an offense against everyone who studies, who researches, and who thinks, and it's only enabled by the promise of secret knowledge about things people believe in their worship. Please don't joust at strawmen. Geogre 04:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

HINT: It's in the fiction section, and there's a reason for that =D --mboverload@ 22:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't talking about the whole book being true! I was talking about discrete facts. E.g. Leonardo Da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa (true); Leonardo Da Vinci was a flamboyant homosexual (false - may have been gay but unlikely flamboyant). I don't think it's unreasonable to expect truth in a novel. Like I said in my original post, am I expected to reject every single thing it says just because it's a novel? Stupid cartoons depict characters obeying the law of gravity - judging by your post, I am stupid therefore, to believe that gravity should exist, since I'm just watching a stupid cartoon. I hope this analogy makes my original point clear. --Username132 (talk) 21:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

June 26

Crossover music between 1940's black and white gospel

Can anyone list gospel music that crossed over between black and white churches back in the 40's? And list the groups that sang or made that music popular? Both the black and white artists? Thank you for your time and consideration.

will grand father's dna and grand son's dna match?

will grand father's dna and grand son's dna match? By testing the dna of these two can it be confirmed whether the child is the grand son or not?

• I'm not a specialist on this, but as the Y chromosome is passed down from father to son, I would say these particular chromosomes would match if they're biologically related. At most you'd need to do two paternity tests. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

A Y chromosome test will only work if he's the paternal grandfather, not the maternal one. I think a normal paternity test should work in either case, although the confidence level will be lower than that for a parent and child.-gadfium 08:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Of course, confidence will get lower when you do more tests. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:56, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It's actually possible for a maternal grandfather and grandson to be unrelated genetically, although quite unlikely. This could happen if none of the chromosomes passed down by grandpa to mom were passed on the the grandchild. The chances of this are (.5)^23. This works out to be 1 in 8,392,608. If we use 6 billion as the current population of the Earth, there should be around 715 people on Earth who are unrelated to their maternal grandfathers. If you are one of those, then there is no way to establish the relationship solely using the grandfather's and grandson's DNA, the mother's DNA would also be needed. For everyone else, including all paternal grandfather's of grandsons, DNA testing should work, although every chromosome (except the Y) would need to be checked for accuracy in the maternal grandfather cases. If only one or two chromosomes are shared, however, this could be expected in isolated communities, where everyone likely has a few shared chromosomes from common ancestors way back. StuRat 16:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

No, there aren't 715 such people: in fact, this is so unlikely that it is essentially impossible. The reason your probability calculation is misleading you is that you've ignored the fact of recombination; one can estimate that there will be one recombination event per chromosome per generation. - Nunh-huh 19:24, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

That appears to be a type of mutation, which would make it even more likely that a maternal grandparent wouldn't have any chromosome exactly the same as his grandson. StuRat 22:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. It's not a point mutation, it's the mechanism by which genes are reassorted between a chromosome pair, making the "daughter" chromosome different from either of the "parents". Your mistake is in thinking that chromosomes are transmitted without recombination, i.e., as units, rather than as a mixture of genes from a chromosome pair. - Nunh-huh 22:45, 26 June 2006 (UTC) (And the comparisons in "paternity" tests are not of whole chromosomes, but of specific gene loci or other markers.) - Nunh-huh 22:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Isn't there a test where they add a dye to the chromosomes and look for identical banding patterns ? Such a test would compare whole chromosomes, not individual genes. StuRat 15:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Random somewhat-related article: Y-chromosomal Adam —Keenan Pepper 16:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm no scientist (and this isn't the science desk) but here are my thoughts. First, a Y-chromosome test would not be that useful because in theory it can give a positive result if the two subjects are, say, sixth cousins (with a common ancestor on the paternal line) just as if they are grandfather and grandson. As for a "regular" DNA test, if you had just the two individuals you could look at a large number of junk-DNA segments (which statistically have a very high degree of variability among humans) and if the individuals are grandfather and grandson, then approximately one-quarter of these specially-chosen DNA segments should match. However, a one-quarter match could just as easily be uncle-and-nephew. Could also be two half-brothers, I think. Maybe a variety of other relationships as well. --Mathew5000 20:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

For more info, search Google on the keywords grandpaternity dna. --Mathew5000 20:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Iran's foreign relations

Hi,

I'm working on a schoolpaper about Iran, about the Islamic Revolution in 1979 and the consequences and outcome. Now, what I really would like to add is the diplomatic relationship between Iran and the Netherlands (where I'm from). It's easy to find information about the US, but I can't find what I want to add. Can anyone help me? Thanks. --Soetermans 09:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know only the US and the UK (after the Rushdy fatwa) broke off existing diplomatic relations. But why don't you ask the information service of the Dutch Foreign Office, buza @ postbus51.nl? --Lambiam^Talk 09:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Lambiam, I'll try that! --Soetermans 13:21, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Modified Dutch Foreign Office e-mail to make it spam-harvester resistant.--ByeByeBaby 13:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Won't the @ sign still give it away? Anyway, this email address must be all over the place, so dont' they get loads of spam then anyway? Or aren't spammers all that stupid? DirkvdM 18:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Redeeming Social Values

Hello!

What does these expression means:

Redeeming Social Values; No Redeeming Social Values?

Best regards,

_____ 09:56, 26 June 2006 (UTC)Oculto

To me, it means that something has a justification for existing that may not immediately be apparent. For example, one person might say that The Texas Chainsaw Massacre has no redeeming social value and is simply a grotesque horror film. Someone else might argue that it has redeeming social value in that, aside from all the gore, it has things to say about the society in which we live. I'm sure others will be able to think of better examples... --Richardrj 10:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Schindler's List might be an example of a horrific movie which does have something important to say, while none of the Halloween movies have anything important to say about anything, StuRat 15:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure, but Schindler's List is perhaps not the type of film that one would describe as having "redeeming social value", because it doesn't have those negative aspects in the first place. In order for the phrase to be appropriate, you'd need to have that contrast between something's apparent lack of content and its redeeming value. --Richardrj 15:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Then how about the original Japanese Godzilla movies, which seemed to be just silly monster movies, but did have an environmental message in them that nuclear weapons testing and usage was likely to have profound, negative, unexpected consequences ? StuRat 16:30, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely, that would be a good example of some apparent schlock having redeeming social value. --Richardrj 18:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

By the way, this question would have been better asked on the language reference desk. --Richardrj 16:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

physical education

Its is true that a girl who enter physical activity may lost her virginity

No, but her hymen may rupture. Virginity is not to be equated with an intact hymen. Her hymen may also begin as incompletely obstructive or perforated. Additionally, she may break the hymen without anything overly strenuous. It's a part of the body intended to tear, so it shouldn't be awfully surprising that sometimes it tears without sexual intercourse. Geogre 12:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Female virginity has been defined in many cultures solely by the existence of an intact hymen. This is because that can be easily verified, while her history of sexual activity can't. This does lead to some humorous results, however, like many women "losing their virginity" to a horse. This is why the "sidesaddle" method of horseback riding was developed for women. StuRat 15:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Engaging in certain forms of physical activity with a partner of the opposite sex may entail a woman's loss of virginity. However, these are usually not part of the phys ed programme. As to the hymen test, some women are born without one. So can't they lose their virginity because they never had one? --Lambiam^Talk 16:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a citation for that claim about sidesaddles, Stu? --LarryMac 16:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

No, and I would expect some reluctance to talk about this somewhat delicate topic, making it difficult to find a frank discussion. Girls bicycles not having a bar may also be related to this, as one fall on the bar could cause the hymen to tear. (Dresses might also be a problem with the bar, but not many girls would wear a dress while riding a bike today, so why are they still barless ?) StuRat 16:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the bar is because of dresses. As for changing fashion -- girls who do not wear dresses and do not care if there is a bar there no doubt just buy "boy" bikes. It would make no sense for them to make "girl" bikes with a bar (what would the difference be, then -- a paint job?). --Fastfission 17:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Girls bikes might have colored streamers on the handlebars, a basket in front for purses, and come in pastel colors, while a boys bike might have a heavy duty suspension, be a dark color, and have a device for making motorcycle sounds. StuRat 21:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Many products are marketed separately to boys and girls, for no apparent reason. A few years ago there was a Barbie computer for girls and a Hot Wheels computer for boys, for example. This trend continues into adulthood. Hair dye, for example, is marketed exclusively to men or women, while there is the no inherent difference in the dying process based on gender. Razors are also marketed by gender, as are many other products. The most extreme example is calcium and iron supplements aimed at women only (although "Fe for females" seems to have a certain ring to it :-) ). StuRat 21:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Pointless discrimination is all around us. At the Oscars, in most categories awards are made on merit, without regard to the sex of the people involved. But in the acting categories, the sexes are separated. Yet as soon as they walk out the door of the pavilion, all the actresses become "actors" once more. Funny, that. JackofOz 23:13, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Virginity is in the mind. --mboverload@ 22:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Mahler

Could someone tell me what the slow movement of Mahler5th depicts? Muriel

If you type "Mahler" in the search box in the upper left, you will get the article Gustav Mahler. Near the bottom is his work. You can click on a link to Symphony No. 5 (Mahler). At the bottom of that, you will find links to more online resources about this particular symphony. --Kainaw ^(talk) 19:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

What leads you to think it depicts something? Most symphonic music is not meant to depict something. Works that do, such as The Sorcerer's Apprentice, are the exception. --Lambiam^Talk 19:40, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Most music "appreciation" teachers feel that all music must depict something. I had one who said that since a specific song was "pastoral", it must represent a "pasture". I asked why it couldn't represent a "pastor" and he became very angry at the wordplay. --Kainaw ^(talk) 19:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

mmm, and composers are often a bit enigmatic with their terms as well. many people thought Vaughan Williams' Pastoral Symphony was about the English countryside when the 'pastures' it depicts are actually the empty scarred battlefields of France in World War I. but back to the point, just because the Mahler movement does not depict a 'real' image there is still the question of what emotions Mahler is conveying in it. but that is really another matter. --Alex.dsch 09:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

In Need Of Help

I am gain in need of your superior abilities for help in the quiz I am doing.

http://img141.imageshack.us/my.php?image=19qr7.jpg Can you please tell me who this man is... he had a capital city named after him.

Looks like James Monroe. See Russian F 18:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

http://img67.imageshack.us/my.php?image=26we.jpg Please do you know what this statue is... it`s apparently the principal figure of a poem.

The ancient mariner, from Samuel Taylor Coleridge's The Rime of the Ancient Mariner ("Instead of the cross, the Albatross / About my neck was hung.") - Nunh-huh 19:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

and finally.. http://img141.imageshack.us/my.php?image=43xo1.jpg this system is named after a French Scientist any ideas on who he is ?

Notice that the X and Y axes are labeled volume and pressure, respectively. I suspect the quadrilateral ABCD is made up of two isotherms? In any case, it seems that the graph is related to some aspect of the ideal gas laws, of which the most pertinent would seem to be Boyle's law. The problem is that Boyle, of course, wasn't French, but, as our article states, "Edme Mariotte (1620-1684) was a French physicist who discovered the same law independently of Boyle in 1676, so this law is often known as Mariotte's or Mariotte Boyle law." Confirmation of this is needed, though, I'm not at all certain of what the graph is particularly representing. - Nunh-huh 19:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Or could it be Nicolas Léonard Sadi Carnot and the Carnot cycle, what with the arrowheads? --Lambiam^Talk 19:18, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, see [3]. --Lambiam^Talk 19:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Again much appreciated.

ships

iam trying to research a ship called barque rosalie, the year was either 1886 or 1887. my great grandfather sailed on it but i dont know where to start looking to find it. im tracing my family tree and would love to know more about this ship

• A barque is a sailing ship with three or more masts; that's not part of the name, which would be Rosalie. Can you give us more information about your great grandfather, such as what country he lived in? --Halcatalyst 20:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

There was a ship named the "Barque Rosalie" that transported immigrants to Philadelphia aroung 1844, probably the same ship you're talking about. In ships passenger lists, the name of your grandfather, the port of departure, the destination port (as well asw the date, which you've provided) may narrow down the search. - Nunh-huh 20:56, 26 June 2006 (UTC)*

Try Lloyd's Register--hotclaws**==(81.136.162.4 05:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC))

Fall of Syracuse

The article on the Second Punic War dates the end of the seige of Syracuse at 211 BC, but several sources I've seen at give the date as 212 BC. Can anyone confirm one date or the other.

If the date is 212, is this before or after the Battle of the Upper Baetis in Hispaia. It says that that battle was "in late 212 BC", so it would probably have fallen before, but If anyone could tell me that specificly it would help alot. Thanks.

The article Syracuse, Italy states: "Hiero's successor, the young Hieronymus (ruled from 215 BC), broke the peace with the Romans, who, led by consul Marcus Claudius Marcellus, besieged the city in 214 BC. The city held out for three years, but fell in 212 BC." This suggests it was late 212, or else it would have been "two years". The article on Archimedes also has 212, as does one source in print I could consult. On the other hand, the article List of battles of the Second Punic War lists the Battle of the Upper Baetis in 211 BC! --Lambiam^Talk 21:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thats strange. The inconsistencies pile up. The article The Second Punic War says Syracus fell in 211 after a Two year seige.

As for the Battle of the Upper Baetis The article on Hasdrubal Barca says the battle was fought in late 212 BC, but the page on the battle itself says it was in 211.... --Krakenofthesea 22:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you should look for official documents on for the death date of Archimedes. His official website says that Syracuse fell in 212. Here it also says 212.
Russian F 22:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Searching an article: Nome de guerre

I am searching for a article which describes the concept of "nome de guerre". Like "espirit du corps" it comes from the french language and basicly means a nickname obtained by a military unit because of some famous action, etc. I searched allready but perhaps it is simply spelt wrongly (I am not fluent in french). Flamarande 20:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Close enough... Pseudonym#Nom de guerre --zenohockey 20:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

• You'll find what you're looking for at Nom_de_guerre#Nom_de_guerre. --Halcatalyst 20:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, for future reference -- esprit de corps (which redirects to Morale). --LarryMac 16:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe that both articles are simply wrong. "Nome de guerre" is described as basicly an "alias" used by the resistance, and "espirit de corps" is simply described as morale.

As far as I know Nome de Guerre is rather a name gained because of some wellknown action (heroic or not) of a military unit which then adopts this name, turning it an official one for it. "Espirit de corps" was mainly coined by Napoleon and is basicly a bit of arrogance/belief in oneself's superiority against his enemy (If we believe we are better, then we are), It also a kind of mental resistance to survive and will to win no matter what, and a wilingness to support ones comrades-in-arms no matter the odds (a la: We will leave noone behind). It is fostered primarly in elite/special units. I might be wrong, though (highly unlikely in these particular cases). Flamarande 16:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

If you think that additional information is needed in either article, then be bold and edit -- with proper citations of course. But please at least use the correct spellings, which have been provided for you. --LarryMac 19:53, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

And what's all this talk about gnomes de guerre? We shouldn't be using gnomes in war! Those poor innocent creatures should be left alone to go about their own business in the shrubs without being drawn into human squabbles! It's an outrage! -- Miss Emily Letella, a.k.a. Ground Zero | t 19:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Lightbulb

How many humanities specialists does it take to change a lightbulb? --Dweller 20:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Including yourself? Flamarande 20:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

This question has been posted on all reference desks ( except /M) --hydnjo talk 20:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I can't resist (I have a weakness for lightbulb jokes): "How many Marxists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?" A. "None: the lightbulb has to develop its own revolution from within." Geogre 01:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Nice try Geogre, but the scientists have won this. Shame... I was rooting for you guys. --Dweller 06:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

One. And a ladder. And a notebook. And some photocopies. And a penguin classic paperback. And a computer science major she's friends with who'll be glad to help her technically while she reads at the beach, and writes some of her thoughts in the notebook. Also, a highlighter would be beneficial so she can mark up the photocopies. And, obviously, her friend needs a new lightbulb to replace the old one with, but I'm sure he'll be glad to purchase/supply one.

How many Microsoft vice presidents does it take? A: "That is proprietary information. As soon as you have paid the appropriate licensing fees and signed the EULA, you will be automatically updated to Lightbulb 2.0." Geogre 19:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Just for fun, here's my favourite lightbulb gag. Dedicated to you, hydnjo. How many Country & Western singers does it take to change a lightbulb? Four. One to change the lightbulb and three to sing about how good the ole one was. --Dweller 22:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I am a lightbulb joke maniac. "How many lesbians does it take to screw in a lightbulb?" A: Three: one to change the lightbulb, and two to write a folk song about it. "How many music fans in Athens does it take?" A: Only one, with 99 on the guest list. "How many sorority sisters does it take?" A: One: she holds the lightbulb up in the air, and the world revolves around her. "How many fraternity brothers does it take?" A: Five: One to screw it in, two to get a keg, and two to order t-shirts. Geogre 03:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Q: How many lightbulb jokes does it take to get hydnjo into vandal patrol mode?
A: One *blush*, only one! --hydnjo talk 13:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Q: How many lesbians does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

A: That's not funny.

--Anchoress 13:40, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Majority Government

When was the last time that Canada had a majority government?

The Liberal Party formed Canada's last majority government following the federal election of 2000. It was their 3rd straight majority, caputuring 172 of 301 possible seats.

Coalition govenrment

When was the last time that Canada had a coalition government?

1917 perhaps? Try Unionist Party (Canada) and Canadian federal election, 1917. Adam Bishop 00:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. To my knowledge, Canada has never had a coalition government. Of course I may be wrong, but I can't think of any occurrence of a coalition government in Canada. Loomis 00:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Sport and regeneration

At the moment I'm researching the how much hosting major sporting events (Commonwealth Games, Olympics, various World Cups etc) affect the regeneration of cities. Are there any good links to websites that document this well? (at the moment most of the information I have found has been about the Manchester Commonwealth Games) --iamajpeg 20:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I would guess that they help in the short run but possibly hurt in the long run, as excess stadium capacity leads to abandoned buildings and urban blight. A continuous source of income is what cities need, not just rare events. StuRat 22:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe, maybe not. Remember that major sports events are great advertisements for the cities - increases in tourism tend to last for a considerable time. ISTR that Barcelona is still reaping benefits tourism-wise after the olympics they held a dozen or more years ago. Grutness...wha? 03:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Heres an analysis of the economic and regeneration effects of the Olympic Games link Jameswilson 03:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, the renovation of the city around the venues adds revenue. It isn't just arenas that are built. There are new transportation facilities, new housing, street improvements, etc. In addition, the Olympic host citiess are also hosts to Olympic Arts Festivals, which often lead to the building or renovation of new museums and art galleries. User:Zoe|^(talk) 03:16, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Excess capacity in transportation, housing, roads, museums, galleries, etc., is also a problem. Unless there is a permanent increase in population or tourism to pay for and occupy those things, they will fall into disuse and disrepair and cause urban blight. StuRat 15:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• Manchester did well developing an area after the Commonwealth games and used the stadium to replace an old soccer stadium so it is still in full use,but us canny Northerners don't like to waste money.It all came in under budget as well.Pish-tosh Wembley Stadium! hotclaws**==(81.136.162.4 05:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC))

• Does that thriftiness seep over the border from Scotland ? BTW, what happened to the old, abandoned soccer stadium ? StuRat 15:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Adrimalty Law

I once heard some milita guy state that all US law that is not common law or maybe just all law is actually adrimalty law at its core. Or something like that. What do you think? 21:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)(Hobgoblin)

First, it is admiralty law. Second, it is clearly defined as "laws that govern maritime issues". Perhaps he was claiming that the U.S. is a maritime vessel and all laws on it are maritime laws. If so, he's a nut. --Kainaw ^(talk) 21:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

You have to read the articles Common law and Civil law. The first is based upon the old english law and was inherited by these impudent colonials. Flamarande 21:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

IANAL. However, it seems that there are some people that interpret the phrase "Federal courts shall have exclusive jusrisdiction over admiralty law" to mean that federal courts only have jusridiction over admiralty law, and no jurisdiction over anything else. Obviously all sane people and the courts themselves disagree. There also people who say that having a fringe on the flag makes it a military flag and a court that uses such a flag must either be court-martial or an admiralty court (apparently because admiralty must be related to admiral, and that's sort of military sounding). Pretty much all indoor flags (and so ones that are in courts) have fringe, because there's no wind inside and the fringe makes it look nicer (it doesn't hang as limply). That's seen as evidence of the fact that they are in fact admiralty courts. Again, the courts say these people are crazy. --Ornil 22:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Blue Streak Sound Track

Does anyone know what the title of the song is that has jazzy-ish/electric piano in it? It's played frequently throughout the film, but does not appear to be in the list of songs in Blue Streak's soundtrack (I've downloaded a few likely candidates and sampled even more, but I can't find it!). --71.117.39.90 21:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

IMDB lists three songs from the movie that are not on the soundtrack at amazon.com: "Nuthin' But A "G" Thang" by Snoop Dogg, Leon Haywood and Frederick Knight, "Jungle Brother (Urban Takeover Remix)" Written by Nathaniel Hall, Samuel Burwell, Michael Small and Michael Oliver Performed by Jungle Brothers, and "Seis Salines" Traditional, Arranged by Edwin Colon Zayas Performed by Edwin Colon Zayas Y Su Taller Campesino. My guess is maybe "Seis Salines"? I have never seen the movie, so I can't be much help... 128.197.81.181 21:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, but unfortunately I can't find it. "Seis Salines" turned out to be a Mexican ballad, or something like that. Again, I appreciate the help. --71.117.39.90 00:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

looking for list biggest chinese cities

Hello,

this question may seem weird, but some time ago I found a list here of the 50 biggest (in population) Chinese cities. Now both Google and Wikipedia Search button don't seem to bring me back to that page. I just can't find it anymore. Does it still exist?

Thanks,

Evilbu 21:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

List of cities in China should do the trick — Lomn | Talk 21:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Alternately, [4] is a list of cities in China with more than 100,000 inhabitants (but the list is more than 50 cities long). 128.197.81.181 21:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I really couldn't find it back, even though the name is indeed quite logic. Evilbu 14:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

al?

How do I propose adding an article to Wikipedia?

Under the heading of "wisdom", I would like to add an article called "wisdom-inquiry". Wisdom-inquiry is academic inquiry rationally devoted to seeking and promoting wisdom, construed as the capacity to realize what is of value in life, for oneself and others, wisdom thus including knowledge and technological know-how, but much else besides. The English philosopher, Nicholas Maxwell, has published a number of books and articles on wisdom-inquiry. See, in particular, his "From Knowledge to Wisdom" (Blackwell, 1984), and his website www.nick-maxwell.demon.co.uk How do I go about proposing such an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scruple (talk • contribs)

Seeing as you have a username, just go ahead and write it yourself! See Help:Starting a new page, part of the Wikipedia:Editing FAQ. Good luck and I hope it goes well! Ziggurat 23:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

June 27

1996 movie "Michael" (Starring John Travolta) obscure reference in credits

In the credits for the 1996 movie "Michael" there is an acknowledgement to MTM productions for the use of a clip from the Mary Tyler Moore Show. Where in the movie does the show clip appear? Thank you.

--207.69.139.7 02:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Baptist Marriage

Do Baptist Believe that marriage is a sacrament ?

All Christian churches recognize three rites: baptism, marriage, and burial of the dead. Geogre 04:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Not really. See Sacrament. --Nelson Ricardo 04:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Not only not really, but not even close. A lot of Evangelical Protestants consider that only baptism and communion are sacrements. I suspect that includes a lot of baptists, but not necessarily all. Incidentally, Baptists are not a denomination in the same sense that Anglicans or Roman Catholics are; there are lots of different branches of Baptist, and they don't necessarily believe the same things. DJ Clayworth 14:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

You guys are playing very hard with the meaning of "sacrament." It's true that the Baptists are congregational, so there is huge variety, but ... well, all I can say is that I've never seen one that didn't recognize marriage as a sacrament in the same sense that baptism and "communion" is. Now, what these churches think of sacrament itself is very, very, very different from what the older churches think. There are seven sacraments, as our article indicates, but there is a minimum three, too. We're about to go way off the rails with technicality, I think. Geogre 15:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

"Christian churches hold sacraments to have been instituted by Jesus". Of the seven "roman" ones cited in our article, some he instituted, and some he submitted to (baptism, anointment of the sick (only : feet oiled by the Magdalene). And if he married her, that was kept secret. When did he say "do the same" ? for one prayer, forgiveness, and eucharism. Churches and groups do what they like - he won't come and tell "I never said that". --DLL 18:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Jesus attended a wedding in Canaan and blessed it in the Gospel of John. Geogre 19:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

US Presidential election colours

I was looking at some Wikipedia articles, and I noticed that until the United States presidential election, 2000, red was used to symbolise Democratic voting states and Blue was used to symbolise Republican states. Since 2000, though, it's been the other way around. Red = Republican and blue = Democratic. Why the switch? Battle Ape 07:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know the change was made by TV networks for reasons known only to themselves. Incidentally there was research carried out last year into the effect of different coloured strips on the achievement of sporting teams. They concluded that teams with red colours are more likely to win. AllanHainey 11:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly, in Britain red is the colour of the left-of-centre (but increasingly less so) Labour Party, while blue is the colour of the right-wing Conservative Party. --Richardrj 12:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

What began as the whim of a TV graphics designer and has since become a cultural convention. Personally, it seems a little odd, since everywhere else in the world, red is used for left-leaning parties and blue for right-leaning parties. But it isn't likely to change anytime soon, considering how well-established the imagery of the "red state" and "blue state" has become in the public imagination. Hell, "blue" has started to become a shorthand term for "Democrat", particularly "Liberal Democrat", on the Internet (e.g. ActBlue.com, Blue Mass Group, etc). They're silly terms, but what are you going to do? Americans like to identify groups by their colors. Remember the blue and gray? Bhumiya (said/done) 13:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Not just Americans! In German politics, for instance, every party has its own 'colour', and coalitions are always referred to by the colours of their constituent parties. For instance, the former governing coalition of the SPD (Social Democrats) and the Greens was referred to as the "red-green" coalition. The CDU (Christian Democrats) are associated with black, the FDP (Liberals) with yellow, and so forth. It's become ingrained in the national politics. — QuantumEleven 12:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Not to forget Pan-Blue and Pan-Green, now I'm allergic to anything Taiwan-related that is green. -- Миборовский 21:35, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Blue and red are natural colors to represent the parties, since the U.S. colors are red, white and blue. My guess is the networks decided not to use red for the Democrats because they did not want to be accused of associating the Democrats with socialism. -- Mwalcoff 03:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Mormon belief of God

In this article it mentions

"Mormons, for example, hold that the God of this universe — who created humanity (or at least guided our evolution) — was once Himself a mortal being who was created by a previous God in a prior universe or context."

Is this true? I can't find any reference to this belief in either the Mormon article or in Articles of Faith (Mormonism). Thanks! Madd4Max 14:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

That seems to be the case, as this article in a Mormon wiki would indicate. However it seems to be something that the LDS don't like to talk about and it doesn't make it into Wikipedia articles. DJ Clayworth 14:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

It seems difficult to check the source indicated in that m&m wiki. It is only a .edu that is difficult to link with [last saint's] "official" site. What do you think ? --DLL 18:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

See Mormonism, Nature_of_God and LDS, Godhead. —Wayward ^Talk 00:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Little boy exploded a bit too late?

I heard a rumor that Little boy, the nuclear device, exploded a bit later than expected, when it was dropped over Hiroshima. For a very brief moment, that apparently would have made it look like the worst thing was about to happen : a harmless, but perfectly armed new weapon was just 'donated' to the Japanese.

Is that correct?

Evilbu 14:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes and no. Per this site, the fuze was set for 610 meters (though the site incorrectly labels the fuze as radar-, rather than atmospheric pressure-, driven). The bomb actually exploded at 580 meters, so there was a 30 meter lag. Assuming a ballpark terminal velocity of 400 km/h, that's a "late" detonation of about a quarter-second. So yes, the detonation appears to have been late, but it was late by an insignificant amount, and absolutely no one was capable of monitoring the bomb's altitude anyway.

The most likely explanation is that the crews simply became increasingly nervous, as the bomb fell, that something would go wrong -- even though the bomb was on schedule and operating as planned. — Lomn | Talk 14:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

(Little Boy had both proximity (radar) fuses as well as barometric fusing. Just a nit-pick.) --Fastfission 17:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, I suspect that, even if the bomb didn't detonate, that it would have been destroyed on impact due to the force of the impact and explosion of the conventional explosives onboard. Thus, it would act as a far less effective "dirty bomb", but would be rendered useless in the process. Nuclear weapons dropped by parachute or landing in water are more likely to survive the impact, however. StuRat 15:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Good point. It also seems plausible that, as a gun-type weapon with only two pieces of fissile material, impacting could have created a (very-low-yield) critical mass on its own. — Lomn | Talk 15:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

As for the bomb not going off... An often-repeated story is that the scientists who developed the bombs told the President to invite all the heads of the world to Nevada to see it for themselves and they would surely quit fighting. However, the President was afraid of what would happen if there was a glitch and the explosion didn't happen. So, he said that they would drop both bombs and, if they didn't work, the Japanese would just think they were regular bombs that didn't go off for some reason. I have never seen anything official to back this story up, but I hear it in just about every documentary I see on the bombs. --Kainaw ^(talk) 15:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

My solution would be to demonstrate it to a group of Japanese POWs. If it worked, send them home to tell Japan about it, if not, just keep them as prisoners until the war was over. StuRat 16:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you think the Tokyo command would have believed the fantastical stories of a group of Japanese POWs to the point of surrendering an empire? They didn't even believe the first reports that the attack on Hiroshima was caused by a single bomb until after the attack on Nagasaki, if I recall. --Fastfission 17:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

At the time, Japanese military culture considered surrendered soldiers to rank slightly below "scum of the earth". Soldiers were supposed to die rather than be captured, so the POWs probably wouldn't even have been listened to. --Serie 20:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't expect the Japanese to surrender solely based on the POW testimony, but when their story was confirmed by Hiroshima, that might be enough to get them to surrender without Nagasaki. StuRat 21:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

To use such an expensive device on such a dubious plan (and one which there is no good indication that it would work) seems like a very bad decision to me. The only reason it would sound like a sensible one is if you believe that the dropping of the atomic bomb was the worst of all evils—I'm not sure that's an idea that really holds up to logical scrutiny. --Fastfission 20:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm talking about demonstrating TRINITY to the Japanese POWs, not Fat Boy or Little Boy, so there would be no additional weapon destroyed, and the cost would be almost zero. I don't expect it would prevent Hiroshima, but would convince them we had a powerful bomb in conjunction with Hiroshima. They couldn't argue that it was multiple bombs or a meteor, or whatever other wacky theory they might have had, if there were Japanese eyewitnesses who had seen an atomic bomb detonated before. Thus, Nagasaki might have been prevented. StuRat 00:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

There is no reason to think that Nagasaki would have been prevented if one more account (from unreliable sources) was added to this. Remember that Nagasaki occured only two days after Hiroshima. Even after Nagasaki it took almost a week before the final decision went through. Would a speculative report from Japanese prisoners held under duress and subjected to a carefully prepared American demonstration have changed anything? Very, very unlikely. --Fastfission 01:02, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

So basically the bomb had an altitude measuring system to determine the time of detonation, rather than a timer? Thanks. Yes the Japanese POW plan would probably not have worked, but what would have worked is a demonstration on some island.Evilbu 19:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

That's correct. However, I did just consider that crewmembers probably knew about how long drop to detonation would take and could have been timing it, so that could add a factor to the personal uncertainty.

As for an island test, there are a couple points against it:

1. The Japanese were pretty stubborn at this point. See Fastfission's last comment above.
2. Reliable observers would have been tough to come by.
3. The US only had 2 bombs after the Trinity test, and there's an understandable reluctance to use half of your hopefully-war-ending arsenal on a test of already-questionable merit. — Lomn | Talk 20:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Not just war-ending, but expensive as all hell, too. It is also worth noting, as it well known, that it isn't as if the U.S. were not already involved in massive bombing campaigns of civilian cities in Japan. I'm not saying that we shouldn't take nuclear weapons seriously, but making the atomic bomb into a bigger moral question than it was considered by military commanders at the time is something of an anachronism. (Oh, and yes, the crewmembers had a pretty good estimate of how long it would take before detonation—it was something worth knowing if you didn't want your plane to get caught in the blast!). --Fastfission 20:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The Japanese POWs could have been present at Trinity, so there would still be two more bombs left (Fat Boy and Little Boy). BTW, how long was it until the US had their fourth atomic bomb ready to go ? Even if the Japanese still didn't surrender after Nagasaki, I can't see how there was much hurry at this point, since the US could just sit back and wait, Japan no longer posed a military threat. StuRat 21:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

On August 10, General Groves reported to General Marshall that he could have another Fat Man bomb on Tinian and ready to drop by AUgust 24. The U.S. strategy was to try to use a "shock" approach to get a quick surrender one way or another. The longer the war took, the more people would die one way or another, the more it would cost, etc., and if things were allowed to drag out it would become increasingly unlikely that they would get a full surrender. Again, there is no way that the Japanese government would have believed the reports of POWs. --Fastfission 20:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Yet again, I wouldn't expect them to believe the POWs until it was confirmed by Hiroshima. Having two distinct sources of info on the bomb may have forced them to admit to the existence of the bomb and surrender before Nagasaki. StuRat 00:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how more Americans would die if it dragged on, they could just stay out of range on their ships, as America had total air and sea superiority by that time. StuRat 00:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

And why would the war "dragging on" (by which you apparently mean lasting only until the next bomb was ready on August 24th) cause the Japanese to reject unconditional surrender ? The stories of the earlier bombs would only spread further with time, then additional atomic bomb detonations would make the Japanese public eventually demand an end to the war on any conditions offered. StuRat 00:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

The Americans would not simply sit in their ships, for one thing—they wanted to end the war. Trying to "starve out" the Japanese would have probably killed as many of them as Hiroshima, in the end. The more tired the American people grew of war, the more likely they'd encourage a less-than-wrathful solution. If the bomb was not taken as a "shock" then it becomes just another horrible way to die, along with the firebombing. If the bomb had become "normalized", its use would have been reduced considerably as a negotiation mechanism. --Fastfission 01:02, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Well we felt the time was ripe for revenge. It's war. Unnecessarily vulgar comment removed. . I'm probably just being horibly insensitive, tho. --mboverload@ 22:16, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The bomb not exploding might have forced the US to accept some of the Japanese terms for surrender (such as not betraying their religion) and loads of lives would have been saved. Doesn't sound like a worst case scenario to me. Quite the opposite. DirkvdM 08:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

If Japan was allowed to surrender in the way they wanted, the military government would have stayed in power, rebuilt their forces, and then attacked, just as Germany did after WW1, only with nuclear weapons. The result would be a nuclear WW3, a true disaster for the world. Japan needed to be "pacified", which required an unconditional surrender. StuRat 00:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Um, or a massive and bloody invasion would have taken place, as was planned. In any case, the U.S. did in the end accept the one condition that the Japanese had been insisting on all along (to allow the Emperor to retain his rank, if not his political supremacy), they just labeled it as "unconditional". This is a fact that often gets neglected in most discussions on the subject (that the unconditional surrender had one condition, and that condition was the same one that was rejected earlier because the surrender needed to be unconditional). --Fastfission 20:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

There was considerable debate on the retention of the Emperor in the US, and it was eventually decided that he would be useful in ordering the Japanese not to resist the occupation, which he was. Otherwise, we might have had a situation like Iraq in post-WW2 Japan. StuRat 00:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm well aware of why they agreed to it in the end. What I'm pointing out is that there was a condition to the "unconditional" surrender, the same condition that the U.S. previously rejected when the Japanese offered a "conditional" surrender. --Fastfission 01:02, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Civics Question

Can you please give me the refference to the prime minister of India AGAIN?Please.

Try putting "prime minister of india" in the search bar at left -- it's quicker. — Lomn | Talk 14:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Hypothetical UK flag query

If, hypothetically, Scotland were to declare its independence from the UK, how likely is it that the Union Jack be altered? My guess would be "not very", but maybe I'm wrong. Note that I'm not asking about the likelihood of Scotland declaring its independence. But if it did, how would it affect the flag and the national symbols? Also, would the common name of the country be changed (e.g. from "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" to "United Kingdom of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland"? Bhumiya (said/done) 14:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

This is a hypothecital qestion and as such has no real answer. It would largely depend upon the will of the parlament, the wishes of the prime minister, and the mood of the mob. Flamarande 15:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

If Scotland were to gain its independence then it would no doubt be as a part of a long series of discussions and decisions taken alongside the other members of the UK, and the EU, and all of the many and other varied organisations and treaties which Scotland currently belongs to due to it being a part of the UK. If the rest of the members of the UK were also gaining independence, I doubt that the union flag would be used at all, it would just become obsolete. Wales and England would revert (as they are already) to the Dragon and the St Georges Cross. The real question is, what should Northern Irelands flag be now, as it is currently flagless. --84.13.243.110 00:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Hypothetically it would feature a tartan background and the word "Bannockburn" in huge red letters topped with fetching image of a ginger wig. --Dweller 22:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

rarest CD

As noted in record collecting, most record collectors are only interested in vinyl records. The article names some of the rarest and most collectable records in the world, but doesn't mention CDs. So my question is, what is the most collectable/valuable CD? --Richardrj 14:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The Guinness Book of World records online doesn't seem to have an entry for this, and I can't see another mention of the rarest CD anywhere else, just discussion of the "rarest" CD for particular artists in forums! EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME 15:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Another Scottish independence query

That last Scottish question was certainly hypothetical, but this one isn't. I'm wondering how the Scottish independence movement is viewed outside of Scotland. Does it have much support/sympathy in England, Wales, and Ireland? Are non-Scots largely apathetic, or is it perhaps viewed with hostility? Bhumiya (said/done) 15:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Now we are suposed to answer for whole countries/peoples? It largely depends upon politics, and politicians (and the mob) change their political opinions alltoo quickly. My personal view: What would the Scotts gain? They are not oppresed in any way that I know of. Beside a Scottish (at least a descendend of Scotts) monarch sits upon the British throne. Flamarande 15:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't ask whether it was justified. I was asking about the common British/Irish attitude towards it. I consider that a legitimate question that can be answered. For example, if you were to ask me what the average American thought of slavery I could tell you with some confidence that they generally oppose it these days. If you asked me what they thought of a current political issue like gay marriage, I could tell you, based on opinion polls and my personal experience, that just over half of them oppose it. Public opinion isn't a magical, uneffable thing. I imagine most people have a rough idea of public opinion in their own country, so this seems like a question that someone from the UK or Ireland ought to be able to answer. Bhumiya (said/done) 23:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I dont think many English people nowadays are anti-Scottish independence on any emotional level. Personally, I dont mind at all either way. While North Sea oil (off Scotland) was bringing in a lot of money it wasnt in the interests of the English to allow Scottish independence but now we've mostly used that up...! Jameswilson 22:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, James. So, you'd say it's largely an attitude of apathy? Bhumiya (said/done) 23:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I would have to agree with Jameswilson from my perception of the mood of the people of England. Very few people I know of display any particularly strong emotions when the issue of Scottish independence comes up (I for one don't even think about it except for those rare occasions that it is discussed by the media). There are a few practical objections that are occasionally brought up, like the UK turning into two little fish in the EU instead of one of the big fish (quite important in terms of voting power and negotiation), however that particular argument usually earns the reply "Why are we in the EU anyway?" than any comment about Scotland. There has been some stirring in the tabloid press in the last few years that a large number of UK Cabinet posts are held by Scottish MPs and that Scottish MPs have an unfair right to vote on English issues when English MPs can't vote on the same Scottish issues due to devolution. But again, from the people I know, this is generally met with either indifference or contempt for the political system at Westminster rather than any anti-Scottish sentiment. Road Wizard 00:42, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

One thing I should add though is that there is a sense of unreality over the Scottish independence movement as far as it is considered from English people. From the way people react to the topic they seem to be of the opinion that "it'll never happen", so any objections are muted as there isn't really much to object to. If, on the other hand, the Scottish independence movement was to suddenly gain a lot of momentum, the shock would likely stir up a hornets' nest of emotion. Road Wizard 03:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Slavery is an immotive issue about people's fundamental rights and I don't think it bears a comparison. Of course people are going to have an opinion about slavery, whatever country they live in. What do people in the USA think about Texan independence? Thats a much closer question to the one you asked.

I wouldn't say that. Texan independence has never been even a peripheral issue in Texan politics, but in Scotland, the second most popular political party runs on a platform of Scottish independence. It's not the same at all, to my mind. But I admit, after hearing these responses, that the issue doesn't seem to provoke strong feelings outside of Scotland, which frankly surprises me. I suppose on an institutional level, there is relatively little connection between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Still, it would have a significant symbolic effect if Scotland left the union. Speaking as an American and a relative outsider, I'm surprised it isn't more contentious. Bhumiya (said/done) 03:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Since the UK formed, Scotland has enjoyed a seperate and distinct legal system and different educational system, coinage and notes and increased political representation at Westminster (and lots of other things too). James VI of Scotland became James I of England (yes it was that way round!), and roughly 100 years later the Scottish parliament voted to merge with that of England Act of Union 1707. After that the bad treatment that the poor of Scotland got were from its own ruling class. So don't think about Scotland in the same way as other independence movements like Ireland where the "Union" was very one-sided and applied at the end of a sharp blade.

It makes total sense that Scotland gets more power if it wants too. I think most British people think the same. What I find hard to believe is the Scotland could become "totally independent". All countries are mutually reliable, Scotland is not just in the UK but also in the EU. Armed Forces, Foreign Policy are likely to get more integrated with other countries, not less. But domestic issues, and some tax decisions should go to Scotland (and Wales) should it be practible and should the people in those countries want it.

I'm a typical Brit, half English, half Irish living in England but with parents living in Scotland. We are all so mixed. Its like asking a Cornishman what he thinks about Liverpool deciding to have an elected mayor, (that's a fairly new thing here). Scotland and its neighbours are so inter-reliant that independence is more to do with National Spirit and pride than real practicalities. Scotland has got a parliament with some powers which was built at great cost. It would be a pity not to use it.

So all in all, we aren't apathetic, as long as it is democratically done and no one gets shafted. But the EU is growing and we are integrating more and more. If Scotland gains its independence, it will be more symbolic than anthing. And if they want that, why not? --84.13.243.110 01:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The Lark Ascending

I initially just heard this over the radio and I noticed that The Lark Ascending by Vaughn Williams sounds a lot like Chinese classical music. However, it's quite sad that very little Westerners make this observation and go on to praise it as "portraying English beauty"? Anyhow, it was accomplished with a Western orchestra, yet it sounds so much like there's an erhu and a guqin in it. Even the saxophones sound like saxophones, yet it's not their normal style. Another editor before me noticed the same thing but I'm afraid it is rather original research, even though it is highly likely - what a pity. I'm very highly piqued because I thought I was listening to a fusion piece. I didn't know the violin could be used in such a way to sound like Chinese music. John Riemann Soong 15:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

It is possible that the choice of the musical scale gives the general impression of the piece. --DLL 17:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Perception of art is an exchange between the artist and the reader/viewer/hearer. The knowledge, taste, culture and experiences of different hearers are naturally different. Your "quite sad" comment might be a bit shallow and ethnocentric. What would you think if an English listener heard a piece of Chinese music and thought "what a pity the chinese think it sounds chinese and don't realize it sounds like Vaughn Williams"? alteripse 19:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Except it doensn't sound like most of his other pieces. I don't hear many pieces quite like this, and I mean not in terms of melody or portrayal or wonderfulness, but the time signature as well. Of course I thought it was a rather funny coincidence (and had no idea it was Williams and so far back) until I saw the article in which another editor had put his views there. My "quite sad" comment refers to the possible plagiarism from another piece, not from another genre - because I've never heard what the Nightingale piece sounds like so I can't confirm for myself. John Riemann Soong 20:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Saxophone? Weird. I have the Academy of Ancient Music version of it -- quite wonderful. The intervals are a little exotic, in that there are more half-steps and such, but -- de gustibus non disputandem est -- I didn't think it sounded very Chinese. Another possible explanation is the mimesis: Williams was attempting to describe lark song and lark flight, and birds are a common enough theme in Chinese music (at least the trad. Chinese music that I've heard). Geogre 19:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Something very mellow - including the clarinets, too - (although for example they seem to interchange quite well for moods - ie. for Pelleas et Melisande by Faure). I thought it weird because it almost seems that Williams is trying on purpose to sound exotic, but yet it's used to describe an English landscape? (Some other review sites seem to make the remark). I'm just trying to investigate more. John Riemann Soong 20:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

That I wouldn't quarrel with at all. There is something intentionally exotic about the music. With him, though, it's always possible that there is some little known medieval source that he is reinvestigating (cf. Lazarus and Dives, which is paired with Lark on my record, anyway -- little-known folk song). Geogre 21:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Just don't call him "Williams". His surname was Vaughan Williams (unhyphenated), and his given name was Ralph. JackofOz 22:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

secretary cursive and bookhand.

What were the secretary handwriting styles of the 14th and 15th centuries? How did they relate to blackletter or humanist handwriting. Zeimusu | Talk page 15:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

If you mean in England and Europe, then secreterial handwriting from as early as 1315 (attested 1321) to almost the end of the 1400s (the style was already widely proscibed in 1498) enjoyed a major blackletter/humanist revival of doing your own homework..

Eh? Is the above just nonsense? What's the homework reference about. I'm 33 years old. I don't do the homework thing anymore. Zeimusu | Talk page

We do have a blackletter article although this is admittedly not that good (admittedly since I wrote much of it using class notes). "Secretary" styles are just cursive variants of the formal types of Gothic or blackletter, which made it easier and quicker to write. In what sense do you want to know how they are related? Adam Bishop 16:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Well you have largely answered my question; thank you very much. I'd to see a sample. I read about it while skimming through book (whose title I forget), which had a page from a manuscript half in "secretary cursive" but using italic for emphasis. I'm just being curious. Zeimusu | Talk page 15:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

You should see if there are articles on paleography or palaeography, and also check the subjects out at an academic library.--Teutoberg 16:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Children of Hannibal

There is an alternate history, Hannibal's Children. But, did Hannibal historicly have any children; did he even marry/have consorts or anything?

Try [[5]]. There might have been a child of Hannibal but the issue is a bit unclear. Flamarande 19:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Where to Buy a Guqin

I live in Massachusetts, U.S., and I was wondering where, if anyone knows, could one buy a guqin in Massachusetts or if somebody could direct me to a website online that has them. Thank you. -----Seclipse21 18:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, eBay has one for $400... Madd4Max 18:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Why not just run down to the nearest Guqins 'R' Us ? :-) StuRat 21:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Well done & prolificent article! The bets are now open : Who shall find a longer article, about an object, than that guqin ? --DLL 17:50, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

tablerock furniture company

Hi! My name is Dwaine and I'm trying to get some information on tablerock furniture company that used to be located in Morganton North Carolina. I have some furniture built by that company and I'm trying to get some idea of when they were built. Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Hi Dwaine.

A Google search didn't bring much up, unless it happened to be on Table Rock Rd... EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME 19:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Morganton, NC has a lot of furniture manufacturers. I've never heard of one named Tablerock. The popular ones are Drexel and Henredon. There is a big furniture mart in Morganton. Workers there would know if there is a Tablerock Furniture Co nearby. --Kainaw ^(talk) 19:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I asked a coworker (Dr. Brackett) who is from Asheville, NC. He said that his dad worked for Drexel in the Table Rock Furnture Plant in Morganton. --Kainaw ^(talk) 19:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Brace yourself for this one ... does Dr. Brackett only speak parenthetically ? :-) StuRat 21:25, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Dracula / Horror

What is the name of the musical clip played on an organ in many horror films, such as the Dracula series?

The notes are as follows: F D# F C G# A

It's not an adaptation of Toccata and Fugue in D minor, BWV 565 by any chance? Just a not-very-musically-inclined guess. Ziggurat 22:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed it is. Thank you.

"It Belongs to Them, Let's Give it Back"

On my drive to work this morning, that old '80s song "Beds are Burning" by that old Aussie group, Midnight Oil...(you know the one, it's led by that freaky bald dude Peter Garrett,) popped on the radio. The song is obviously about Aboriginal rights in Australia.

I understand the injustices that Aboriginal Peoples throughout the world have suffered upon contact with Europeans. I understand that there were many wrongs done, wrongs which can never be reversed. I also understand that despite the fact that we can't go back in time and reverse these wrongs, much can still be done to restore to these peoples the dignity they deserve, as well as to help to restore to them, as much as possible, what their life was like pre-European contact.

I also recognize that these are issues that exist in every area of the world that was touched by that period of about 500 years ago when Europeans began to explore all the furthest reaches of the globe. However, I'm not very familiar with these issues in non-English speaking countries, so I'll restrict my question to English speaking countries: Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the United States, and at least two African countries: South Africa and Zimbabwe.

That said, I feel that I'm missing something. On the one hand, those champions of Aboriginal rights who happen to be of European descent tend to speak in terms of: "We stole their land". "We're really alien intruders and we don't belong here". Or, like a lyric in the song I was refering to, "It belongs to them, let's give it back". Yet there seems to be some sort of "disconnect" that I have trouble understanding. Is it hypocricy perhaps? I don't know. What I do know is that that freaky bald dude doesn't seem to be practising what he preaches (similar to so many left-wing champions of Aboriginal rights). If "it" (Australia in this case) belongs to "them" (Australian Aboriginal Peoples), and it should be given back, why doesn't he just pack his bags and return to Europe? I'm sure he owns a house on some land in Sydney, why doesn't he find some Aborigine and "give it back"?

Doing a bit of research, I actually learned that this guy is now an Australian member of Parliament! Obviously he considers Australia to be his home and intends to live out his pale white European life there. And he's just one of a whole culture of European descended people living in land "taken" from indiginous peoples, not only in Australia, but in every country I mentioned above.

So to sum up my question, while the injustices done to Aboriginal peoples are clear, and while the "right thing to do" may be somewhat less clear, but still discernable in principle (i.e, as I mentioned above, to do our best as non-Aboriginals to "make things right" and restore to Aboriginal Peoples all the dignity and prosperity they deserve, while at the same time, despite whatever past injustices, recognizing that this has become OUR home too, and that it wouldn't be right to require us to leave,) I'm completely confused by those "activists" who say "we stole their land" and "we don't belong here". What exactly are they suggesting? Are they suggesting that all non-Aboriginal people simply pack their bags and head back to wherever their ancestors came from? Or are they suggesting that we should stay where we are, while maintaining a constant feeling of guilt for being alien intruders in a land where we don't belong? Or, is harping on European guilt just a brilliant marketing strategy for that freaky bald guy to make a tonne of money, without really actually giving a damn either way? Loomis 23:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, the situation is similar here in New Zealand (but with the added benefit/problem of an actual treaty between the crown and the Maori people - the Treaty of Waitangi). Here, the solution - shaky, convoluted and controversial though it may be - is the combined returning of part of tribal lands along with monetary compensation for those parts which cannot be returned. In Australia and the US the situation is worse for the original inhabitants due to the lack of binding treaties, but the situation is surely largely the same: ambandonment of the "reservation" schemes which basically force the native people into unproductive area, return - in name at least - of any parts of their original land which are now federally/state owned, and compensation for the rest. Grutness...wha? 03:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I always interpreted the song as being pro land rights, along the lines of the Mabo case, which was topical at the time (late 80s/early 90s). I don't think he is suggesting that "whiteys" back their bags and leave. Garrett is my local MP and, although he may have made "a tonne of money", I consider him to be one of the more honourable members of parliament.Downunda 05:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Those well-meaning people who talk about what "we" did to "them", should really have a good hard think about what they're doing. They are non-indigenous people whose remarks are directed only to other non-indigenous people. They thereby exclude the very people whose exclusion from mainstream society they themselves are decrying. How sensitive and respectful is that! This kind of self-flagellatory language only serves to perpetuate the very thing they criticise, the separation of citizens of a country into different racially determined cultural camps. If people persist in seeing themselves as either indigenous/non-indigenous first and foremost, rather than as Australians/Canadians/whatever first and foremost, nothing will ever change. That's not to say there aren't appalling problems that need addressing, but reconciliation must start in the hearts of ordinary men and women and children first, otherwise any government programs will never have a hope of succeeding. I am sure Peter Garrett never suggested that non-indigenous Australians leave Australia. Restoring some land justice to aborigines does not require other Australians to leave what is their own country too. It has also been suggested that the British leave Northern Ireland and let the Irish take over. Well, most of the British were born there and that's their home too. How fair would it be to expect them to just pack up and live elsewhere, because of the "sins" of their ancestors? No, replacing one injustice with another never works. JackofOz 07:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

It's symbolic, not literal (or perhaps hyperbolic). The song is asking for recognition - "The time has come, to say fair's fair, to pay the rent, to pay our share." User:Downunda's point is important - the song was released when Mabo had been before the High Court for more than 5 years. Prior to the Mabo decision, the Australian legal system did not recognise that people inhabited the land before the Europeans arrived (the concept of terra nullius) - thus nullifying any claim to title. Mabo recognised that Australia was not an empty land when it was colonised (namely, that indigenous people weren't animals). The native title system recognises that indigenous and non-indigenous proprietary rights can co-exist, not that one supplants the other (this was cemented by the Wik decision). Land rights is something different again, and ownership under the various state Land Rights Acts is only granted where the indigenous claim is the primary claim (and has required a special Act of Parliament each time a claim has been decided). Natgoo 10:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! All well argued points, though I don't necessarily agree with all that was said, I certainly agree with most of it. I'd forgotten about the fact that Australia differs from where I'm from (Canada) in the sense that Australia was considered terra nullius, while Canada was not.

But all this leads me to a follow-up. It's a sort of hypothetical question, so please bear with me. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the Europeans of centuries ago possessed the ethical and moral scruples that seem to have evolved over time, those being, that Aboriginal Peoples are basically our equals, and that to commit those appalling crimes against them is simply unacceptable.

Now imagine an explorer from Europe, landing in the Americas, or Australia, or New Zealand, and explaining to the first Native he met that he, as an "English Christian Puritan" or a "French Huguenot", or a "Spanish Jew", faced a miserable life of persecution where he came from, and would therefore like to settle in this new place and start a new life, along with many of his kinsmen, in order to be free from that rather awful, overcrowded, disease ridden place called Europe, that very place that happens to persecute those of his particular religious faith. (I realize that this is deviating somewhat from actual history, but again, please bear with me).

Now suppose the Native were to respond: "Sorry, but this land is ours and we have a strict policy against immigration by outsiders". What would be the "right" thing for the European to do? Turn his ship around and return home to the hell that was Europe at the time? Or stand up to the Native and tell him: "Look, you live in an enourmous, yet extremely sparsely populated land. We have no intention of interfering in any way with your way of life, and we, as humans, have the basic right to live wherever on earth we choose. Therefore, though we'd prefer to have friendly relations with you, we have weapons to defend ourselves unlike any you have ever seen, and, like it or not, we're coming here to stay and to set up a settlement on a certain piece of land that you apparently have no use for".

My question is, if THIS were the way history played out, would Europeans still be considered in the wrong? No, this time they did not commit any attrocities. No, this time they did not colonize the land in the name of some far away European monarch. They simply settled on the land, albeit against the permission of the Natives, and though they had no wish to decend into violence, they defended their decision with the warning that any interference would be fended off with their vastly superiour weaponry.

What I'm getting at is this: Is the "sin" of the original European settlers focussed on the way they went about settling in what was to them the "New World"? Or does this "sin" consist of not only the brutal treatment of Aboriginal Peoples, but as well, the simple act of settling in a land that "wasn't their's", against the wishes of the indigenous inhabitants? Loomis 21:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh and Jack, I agree entirely with what you say. In fact a few years back I wrote an article denouncing the whole "us vs. them" mentality, and simply suggested that we should all, both indigenous and non-indigenous Canadians, push toward a policy of universal inclusion into Canadian society, as we're all equally Canadian.

The response I got from one particular Aboriginal totally threw me off guard. She basically denounced my argument, and was apparently particularly offended by the fact that in arguing as I had, I was effectively implying that she was "Canadian". Apparently many Aboriginal peoples in Canada don't even recognize themselves as "Canadians" at all, and to my astonishment, to refer to them as "Canadian" was something of an insult. As I said, this argument threw me completely off guard, and as such, I'm too confused by the whole issue to be able to properly respond to it. Hence the original question. What exactly is the right approach to take with regard to our Aboriginal "co-inhabitors"? (That's the best term I can come up with, as pretty much everything else seems to wind up being some sort of insult). Loomis 22:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Its an impossible issue and obviously in practice it was a question of "might is right". But from the ethical standpoint I dont think your settling "nicely" screnario really works. The British settlers in Australia would still have been going to live in somebody elses land without their permission (indeed expressly against their wishes). Which would still have been wrong ethically. Jameswilson 22:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Imagine if a ship landed in Sydney today and the occupants stated that they wanted to live in Australia, they wouldn't interfere with the "locals" but any attempt to stop them would be resisted with force...I can picture the police Rapid Response Team storming the vessel before the anchor hits the seabed! Downunda 22:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I see, so James, if I get your point, and correct me if I'm wrong, it would be ethically wrong to seek (and indeed insist upon) assylum from religious persecution? My family came to Canada about 100 years ago essentially to escape religious persecution. Had they not come here then, I would most likely never have been born. But then again, as you said "it's someone elses land" and my ancestors settled here without the permission of the indigenous people. So are you saying that ethically, the respect of certain group's "land claims" is more important than my own very life?

Sorry James, but if the storm troopers were ever after me, and I happened upon your house, I'd first politely ask you if I may hide out at your place, but if you insisted on leaving me to face certain death, I'm sorry James, but I'd do whatever it takes to force myself in, including knocking you out with a rolling pin. Perhaps you may consider my little "B&E" as "unethical", but in matters of life and death, we simply cannot afford the luxury of considering the niceties of what proper "ethics" may have to say on the point. Loomis 23:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

As for your comment Downunda, I'm sure that Australia, being a civilized country, has a rather humane set of rules for refugees seeking assylum. However, were it to turn away a ship landing in Sydney filled with assylum seekers, yes, I assume the Rapid Response Team would manage to turn them away. But would that be the right thing to do? Oh well, I suppose it's just another case of "might makes right", only this time in reverse. Loomis 23:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Just another thought: Don't you sense any hypocrisy in the sense that the now defunct White Australia Policy is commonly, and rightfully so, denounced as a shamefully racist policy in Australia's history, yet many of you seem to regard as perfectly valid what could essentially be described as an "Aboriginal Australia Policy" - a policy whereby Aborigines should have had the right to exclude from Australian citizenship all non-Aborigines? Granted, the Australian Aborigines are the indigenous people of Australia, while Europeans were late-comers. So compare it to, say, Europe, a continent where the "indigenous people" are all white. Would it not be shamefully racist for Europe to have a "White Europe Policy"? As I see it, if Australian Aborigines have the right to exclude all non-Aborigines from their land, since they are the indigenous people, it would follow that the indigenous people of Europe would equally have the right to exclude all non-white people. Yet, hypocritically, Europeans excluding non-whites from citizenship would be considered shamefully racist, yet the concept that Australian Aborigines should have rightfully been allowed to exclude all non-Aborigines from settling on their land doesn't seem to have the slightest tinge of racism. I fail to see any distinction whatsoever. If a person, based solely on his or her skin colour, is forbidden (or at least rightfully should have been forbidden, in the sense that Australian Aborigines should have had the right to exclude non-Aborigines from settling anywhere on the continent) from settling in the Australia, I cannot see that as anything else than racism once again. Racism works both ways, you know. Loomis 00:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Loomis, three things.

1. Australia and Canada were not (mostly) settled by people escaping persecution - they were sent out to take over the land (and then others followed). Those who were genuinely escaping persecution (including your family) were not the driving force behind this. Lets not confuse the two issues (colonial expansion and refugees/asylum-seekers).

1. Anyway, the more I think about it, I still dont really accept your point, which seems to be that because someone is suffering oppression (in Russia?) they have the right to be admitted to any piece of empty-ish land going. Who owns that land at the moment is somehow secondary. Refugees are perfectly within their rights to try and settle in country X, and hopefully people will be generous, but the current inhabitants should still have the ultimate say-so on how many to admit. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but otherwise sovereignty means nothing.

1. Third, yes of course racism can cut both ways on the individual level. But at the level of policy, I cant see that the measures you mention are so objectionable. Its the same argument as "men-only" clubs are discriminatory but "women-only" clubs are OK. Or its discriminatory to put up a "no gays" sign but "gays-only" hotels are OK. Its a compensation for the general discrimination in society: you cant wave a magic wand and get rid of that so you allow a positive discrimination the other way to even things up - sort of "refuges" for the discriminated-against group where they can "be themselves" without the presence of anyone else. Jameswilson 01:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

This is the same argument used for Affirmative Action in the US, which is legal counter-discrimination. I find such policies totally misguided, in the they seem to imply that the minority is inferior, and needs special treatment. This tends to lead to dependency which utterly destroys minority communities, and also leads to resentment from the discriminated against majority. And finally, any minority who does succeed isn't given credit for making it on their own. My state of Michigan will soon vote to abolish this policy, I hope it passes. StuRat 01:09, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Addressing Jameswilson, if somebody stole money and then spent it all, doesn't he still have to pay back that money? If they stole an object, they're legally allowed to sue in court, I think. However, there's a problem in your third point, and it mostly pertains to social power. "men-only" clubs in history were objected to because there was no real way for women to organize their own clubs and get the necessary funds for them (this was back before the suffrage days, I believe). Even now, there's systemic bias in the way health care experiments are performed (white male default, even though it's been shown that racial minorities and women act differently to different types of treatments). I have the same objection to Affirmative Action because of this... getting rid of Affirmative Action won't get rid of all system biases in the system, but very few people will acknowledge it, people tend to care only about how they're being shafted by the system. --ColourBurst 02:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Any nation has the right to an immigration policy which maintains the "status quo". That is, if it's 90% white now, it should apportion 90% of it's immigration quotas to whites, or perhaps even more, if needed to offset higher domestic minority birth rates which will tend to change the population demographics over time. StuRat 00:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if they have the "right" (as I'm not sure countries have "rights" like people do). I do think it's a racist policy, as in it discriminates based on skin colour. In addition, how is this going to work? What about biracial people? What about caucasoids like Northern Indians and Ainu? I can point out many problems with that kind of policy and it doesn't help the country one bit. --ColourBurst 02:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Also note that many "aboriginal" people displaced, or even wiped out, an earlier occupant of the land. Do they also owe restitution for this ? In Europe, the original occupants were Neanderthals, should the Europeans clone a race of Neanderthals from their bones and teeth, place them back in Europe, then all commit suicide since they no longer have any claim to any land on Earth ? :-) StuRat 00:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

More good points Stu. I welcome all views in this discussion. After all, the main point of my question, as a non-Aboriginal Canadian, is not to push one view or another, but to better understand what for me is an incredibly perplexing issue. Here I find myself born in a country that I call my home, yet there's always this lingering concept being pushed by certain individuals that my being here is somehow "wrong". Any further comments are more than welcome. Loomis 01:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Loomis, I forgot to say. Of course if I was desperate I would do as you say. If I was starving, I'd certainly steal some food or money rather than die. But I shouldnt pretend to myself that stealing is not generally wrong. And I should, I suppose, repay the money when my I get the chance - ie make restitution.

On the general point, its like the Irish-English thing. How far should English people born today be expected to apologise for what went before. I dont feel any personal responsibility, but I know from drunken conversations with politically-aware Irish people ("when it all comes out") they dont trust us even in the current generation. They certainly want me to admit that the English were bastards in the past. Without being too fanciful, I think they are sort of asking themselves - this James seems reasonable enough, but has English culture really changed? - if circumstances were the same would this modern-day Englishman behave in the same way again and let the Irish starve? Jameswilson 01:29, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

There's a problem there - people want "the past to be in the past", but they haven't proven that they've really changed (see the Caledonia_land_dispute). The illegal immigration business in the U.S. is another example of this - in the past, legal immigration was determined solely by your race, so really what's legal is what the government says is legal. There's also immigrants claiming themselves as "true Americans (or other country)" but their ancestors were immigrants, but they imply that other people aren't no matter how long these other people have been in the country. --ColourBurst 02:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

This answer is already too long, but this kind of discussion always seems so ignorant of history. None of you can name a land or a people who have not been invaded, displaced, converted to new religions, had their language changed, had new diseases introduced, etc. Many seem to think England is an arch offender, but for the first 1100 years of its recorded history, it suffered exactly the same fates as any other "tribal" or "aboriginal" people: it was invaded by Italians, by Germans, by Danes, by Dutch, and by French. Its early religions, languages and cultures were replaced. Its gene pool was flooded with those of the conquerors. You get the picture: there is scarely an atrocity perpetrated by the Europeans in any continent which was not perpetrated against some of them in recorded history. How many times did Asians invade Europe with the same level of widespread cultural destruction and replacement as occurred in America and Australia? What do you think happened in Europe and Asia when denser agricultural populations replaced sparser hunter-gatherer populations? Anyone who thinks the European invasion of America is regrettable or should be "undone" should be equally supportive of "undoing" the Mongol invasion of Europe, the Muslim invasion of Europe, the repeated Chinese invasions of Taiwan, the Turkish invasion of Anatolia, the Dravidian invasion of south Asia, the Arab invasion of North Africa and an infinity of others that were just as destructive and "unjust". Terms like "native American" are as racist and offensive now as in the 19th century when it was the Dutch, German, and Irish immigrants who were the "non-native-Americans". So what do we do, tell everyone to go back to some imaginary "starting point" that simply corresponds to the borders of our historical knowledge? Oops, nearly all of us have mixed ancestry with ancestors who came from various places and who sinned against each other in a myriad of ways! So where do we really "belong" and who owes what to whom? It is hard to have any attitude but contempt for the ignorance, political arrogance, and racist naivete of those who pretend that European offenses in America, Africa, and Australia are somehow unique rather than simply more recent and better documented, or that some sort of moral "scorecard" allows claims that one race is morally superior to another because of its "victimhood", or that some people owe others reparations because of ancestral behavior. If we can learn anything from history it is that human beings do terrible things to each other singly and in groups defined in an infinity of ways and all of us are descended from both perpetrators and victims. alteripse 12:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

June 28

William Trent

I found the stub article to one of my ancestors, but it describes Major William Trent III not his grandfather William Trent I, who founded Trenton, New Jersey. I would like to write articles about both (I have a book written by a PhD student from University of Pittsburgh on William III's life).

William Trent senior is listed as William Trent (Trenton, New Jersey) and Major William Trent III is listed as William Trent

How would I go about suggesting that the listings be straightened out? --Ben Trent 16:24, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The best thing to do is to make the William trent page into a disambiguation page, linking to two separate pages called William Trent I and William Trent III. I've made some changes to fix that up. Grutness...wha? 09:45, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Democratic versus Republican

Is there a series of questions I can ask myself to determine whether my thinking, beliefs and situation (income, job type, etc.) qualifies me (compatibility wise) more as a Democrat than as a Republican and vice versa or if I actually lean toward something more or less sinister? ...IMHO (Talk) 03:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Odd question from someone whose userbox claims they're a politician.--152.163.100.72 21:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

There are hundreds of those things. They're worth every bit as much as you pay for them (they're free). For myself, cogito ergo sum Democratus. Geogre 03:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

"I think therefore I am a Democrat?" Think about what? If you apply that to President Clinton then what must have he been thinking about when he did not have women with that sex?" ...IMHO (Talk) 03:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

You mean President Clinton, the Rhodes Scholar?--152.163.100.72 04:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I mean President Clinton who was Impeached. ...IMHO (Talk) 04:35, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

You mean unrelated tangent to deflect the origional comment?--152.163.100.72 21:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

There are a lot of little quizzes online, but most of them are biased. I doubt that your income or occupation would influence your political affiliation, since there are many poor and rich people in both parties. It's mostly ideological. but if you answer "yes" to most of these questions, you probably belong in the GOP. If you answer "no", you probably have more in common with the Democrats. If you're evenly divided, you could probably be a moderate in either party. Of course, it may be that you would prefer the platform of a third party to either major party, but anyway...

Do you support preemptive military intervention?

Do you oppose universal health care?

Do you think social security should be privatized?

Do you think Judaeo-Christian morals should influence policymaking?

Do you think organized labor is a threat to free enterprise?

Do you think marriage should be defined as a union between a man and a woman?

Do you support legislation banning flag-burning?

Do you support capital punishment?

Do you think immigration from Mexico should be strongly restricted?

Do you think American soldiers should remain in Iraq?

If you answered "yes" to more than five, you'd probably be a Republican (or Joe Lieberman). Bhumiya (said/done) 03:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

You forgot, "Do you believe in personalizing and then demonizing complex geopolitical issues and treating entire nations as their leader and all your opponents with pure hate?" Geogre 13:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, do you love the flag with a transubstantiation-inspired passion? "Have not I myself known five hundred living soldiers sabred into crows' meat for a piece of glazed cotton which they called their flag; which, had you sold it in any market-cross, would not have brought above three groschen?" -- Thomas Carlyle, Sartor Resartus. Geogre 14:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay that sounds like a pretty good start. Now how about if I wanted to include Communist in the mix or Nazi, etc. Can we expand this group of questions to include those political parties as well? ...IMHO (Talk) 03:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The Political Compass sounds like what you're looking for. Natgoo 09:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks a great deal. This is more advanced than I was hoping for and moves the decision making process into a more scientific yet still practical realm. Thanks again. ...IMHO (Talk) 10:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

How about making it more realistic for the U.S.:

1. Do you want a group of rich people (mostly white men) to cast your vote for you?
2. Do you want to blame all the nation's problems on anyone who doesn't obey the group you chose?

If you answered yes to both, then you are either a Republican or Democrat - it doesn't really matter which since both parties are for raising taxes and raising taxes and then giving themselves a big hefty raise (which they will cover up by saying they are against the 3% Cost-of-Living raise while passing a 7% raise on the side). Now, if you answered no to either one, you are anti-American and you will burn in hell with all the other flag-burning hippies. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Communism

In simple terms... why does America view Communism as such an awful thing? I don't quite get the concept, I suppose. --Thanks!

Well as in the above effort to define a few major political parties by comparing the answers a member from each party would give to several relevant and distinquishing questions there is as of yet not indiction of what questions might be suitiable or what the answers might be. Consequently Communism can at this point in time be lumped in with Democrat or Republican or both. You have to define Communism in similar terms if you want to find an answer. ...IMHO (Talk) 05:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

That's kind of the issue for me, I don't really understand what Communism is about as compared to Democracy, and why a commie is such an evil thing in the US.... -- Steve (the previous anon poster)

Well alot of it depends upon the reason or basis. Agricultural even with manufacturing endevores that sell products and are centered around a belief in God are usually accepted here in the US. But then as with any group or individual that may include an alternate quirk may also have then gone over the line, i.e., have done something that other individuals or groups can simply not approve or forgive. ...IMHO (Talk) 05:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The article Communist Party USA covers many points about the rise and fall of the Communist idea in America. As a comparison, you may wish to read about the many other countries in the world that have active Communist or Communist-like parties. Road Wizard 05:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

There's quite a mixup between terms and systems here. Communism is an economical policy and democracy is a way to decide which policies (including economic) to use. So in theory they don't exclude each other. However....

First some groundwork. Communism is an ideal in which everyone does what they can and takes no more than they need. That would be very nice, but people aren't like that. So in countries ruled by a Communist Party (and are therefore mis-named Communist States) you get what is usually called State Socialism, with a government that owns everything (nationalisation) and tries to change the attitude of people such that eventually the government can abolish itself and people live happily ever after in total freedom (ironically also the (right-wing) economic-liberal ideal).

In reality, this is done through an oligarchy, with a small group of people controlling the country. This is not democracy and therefore considered very bad in the West in the last century or so. Before that we had kings or Tsars, which were much worse, but we got over that and now that we have 'seen the light' everyone else has to follow. By force, if needs be. This excuse for the 'war on communism' is somewhat understandable (I also prefer democracy, but that's no excuse to force it down other peoples' throats). But there is also the domino theory, which states that if one nation 'falls' the neighbouring countries will too, somehow, and eventually the US will become communist. This is not based on anything at all, but somehow it appeals to the public. And then there's the simple idea that because the economic system of State Socialism is so unlike that of the US that it has to be wrong. This is stupid but classic. Anyone who has a different belief has to be wrong. This has always been in the history of manikind. It was usually about religion, but this time it's about an economical system, which is even more silly.

But there's one more thing. After WWII the USSR effectively confiscated Eastern European countries. This was done through military force (albeit originally against the Germans, but that was effectively just a convenient excuse). And that was understably seen as a real physical threat. I haven't a clue how real this threat was, but it's gone now. Any threat from Cuba was based on suport from the USSR, so that threat is gone too.

But then there's China. Still not democratic, still present in Tibet and only getting stronger. So if there was any threat from China and therefore a solid reason to mistrust them, that is only getting stronger. But they've introduced some free market and now everyone acts like everything is ok (well, almost - there's still the human rights issues). Which is pretty hipocritical. This makes it look like it was really all about the economic system and every people have the right to choose their own system.

Oh, one more thing. The US have the power to push everyone else around, so they do. Another constant in the history of mankind. DirkvdM 08:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and I have to add this one. Democracy in the US? Democracy means that people can vote for whatever idea they wish to support. So McCarthy obviously wasn't a suporter of democracy. But more fundamentally, what choices does one have in the US? Two parties that are barely distinguishable from each other. You can pick any colour as long as it's blue. Yeah, democracy.... DirkvdM 08:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

WOW! I have to say that I don't think I've every heard as much diatribe! I'm not complaining mind you I'm just saying that if I ever need sometimg to keep me busy while sitting on the can... Oh well, lets not get McCarthic. Anyway what I want to ask is if you were going to come up with a list of questions that might tell me whether I would be happier living as a Communist what would those questions be? I already have a few questions to help me decide if I am a Democrat or a Republican from the topic just above. ...IMHO (Talk) 08:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

About China: I don't think that's true... when Japan was poised to rise economically the U.S. hated them too (particularly in Detroit where two men killed Vincent Chin and essentially got away with murder), and the Japanese were democratic! --ColourBurst 16:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

People's Republic of China != China. I for one think the Republic of China is the continuation of Sun Yat-Sen's principles. Also see anarchist communism, collectivist anarchism, gift economy, et al. which are forms of libertarian socialism that rejects an oligarchy for communism. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 18:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, PRC is what I mean... however, Communism in practice is rarely equivalent to Communism in theory. Samuel Webster was the guy who said "Communism works, in theory." --ColourBurst 19:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

That really depends on which theory one means (which really has become an immortal cliche). A fairly testimony of a successful partially classless society is Homage to Catalonia by Orwell, when the Anarchists banded themselves together in the Spanish Civil War (although they called their other opponent, the Moscow Regimists aka Soviets "Communists" with a capital C which tends to exclude the anarchist communists). I however rarely call the Beijing and Moscow Oligarchial Regimists by their self-prescribed names anymore (Gongchandang/CPC and Soviet respectively) because it both the Chinese and Russian terms. Workers organise themselves all the time.

In Singapore there are proposals to organise some lift-upgrading (in the opposition constituencies, ie. Potong Pasir SMC and Hougang SMC purely through voter participation because Lee Hsien Loong somehow morally justifies that it's acceptable to actively discriminate opposition constituencies in the HDB upgrading programme in favour of constituencies that support the ruling People's Action Party. I don't know their latest status, but self-organisation in practice can actually have the potential to be quite successful. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 20:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of Orwell, though, wasn't Animal Farm a counterexample of what could go bad? You can't assume that the Homage scenario would always be the outcome of what happens. --ColourBurst 03:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, it has to do with the Cold War, the Korean War, the Vietnam War (okay, technically all the same thing)... all wars in which the U.S. was fighting Communism. This probably leads to a lot of anti-Communism being thrown about. --ColourBurst 16:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Technically all the same thing?? The Vietnam war was pretty hot, I'd say. And that was about a people trying to oust the occupying force, which was quite the rage at the time, with colonies going for independence. When the 'champion' of these freedom fighters (the US) didn't reply to their request for help, they turned to a closer, more logical ally. Which happened to be a socialist state (China). Which did wake up the US, upon which they did enter the war (on the wrong side), which forced the Viet Minh into the arms of the Chinese (and 'communism') even further. So the US created their own demon, so to say. Sorry, had to get this off my chest. :) DirkvdM 18:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant that the three wars are basically clustered under the cold war category. Whether this categorization is correct (or Americentric) is up for debate, but that's what Wikipedia has done. --ColourBurst 19:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

"The US have the power to push everyone else around"? If that were the case, North Korea (or any other country in the world for that matter) would not have nukes, 9/11 would never have happened, OPEC countries would provide America with free oil, every country in the Middle East, as well as the Hamas led Palestinian Authority, would recognize Israel and quit commiting terrorist acts against Israeli civilians, Iran would end its nuclear programme and apologize profusely for having the temerity to dare disobey the wishes of the American government, the French and the Germans would have supported the war in Iraq, there would be no Iraqi insurgency, Fidel Castro, now without a Soviet Union to back him would be kissing GWB's ass and begging for forgiveness...etc...etc...etc. Yes, the US may be the only "superpower" in the world, but that's a far cry from actually having the power to "control" the world. Believe me, there are a whole load of things that are going on in the world that the American government wished it could change if it had the power...but it doesn't. Loomis 20:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Because communism is the epitome of godliness and as such, unattainable. That's why people hate communism. -- Миборовский 21:33, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I had never thought of it that way, Миборовский, you're absolutely right. We're all jealous of that wonderful utopia in which the state essentially murders millions of its own people, throws those who dare speak their own mind into gulags, or better yet, machine guns them en masse in Tiannenmen Square, leaving a lucky few who could avoid those fates lining up for toilet paper. Oh how I wish I had been lucky enough to have been born in a communist country. Ya ochen revnivii, Миборовский. Loomis 22:43, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Eh. A few things.

1. Nobody was killed in Tiananmen Square.
2. Those who were, were the real communists.

-- Миборовский 00:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

It was rather like the entry into Fallujah in terms that the troops struggled to enter the capital. I guess you could call it a massacre, but plenty of soldiers got killed as I recall. I don't think there was machine-gunning en masse so much than lots of bayonet fighting and tank rolling. Also, there were "real communists" (those singing the Internationale), and then there were those who simply wanted to return to the old regime. Alas.

And, besides the fact that one is describing that oligarchial state, not communism. I'm pretty content with my place of birth, though. I wouldn't have it any other way (though I do dissent against LSL et al.) Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 05:28, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

According to Christianity, we should model ourselves after Christ even though it's impossible to attain perfect righteousness on Earth. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 22:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

"Give to Caesar..." BTW, Christ never advocated communism. Merely, his disciples lived communally. -- Миборовский 00:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

And organise what is ours. But communalism is rather a good choice anyway. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 05:28, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Family groups are family groups whether the relationships are based on DNA, adoption, platonic love, alcohol, crack, or even the same career, subway route or fashion style. The problem with Communism it that it hates Capitalism so much it rejects prosperity of its own while encouraging postal workers to open packages from somewhere else and to steal most, if not all, of the contents (Cuban postal operations). ...IMHO (Talk) 06:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe the term is "platonic". ;-) A high amount of wealth isn't necessarily needed for a HDI or eudaimonia, but now this entire thing is degenerating into generalisations. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 06:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey guys, you haven't been listening. Communism is that ideal state that is unattainable, as Миборовский puts it, not what those countries have that are called communist (but aren't). But he also states that Christ was no communist, which he was. Living in a commune is the only attainable form of communism because only if you all know each other will you be willing enough to sacrifice your own needs for those of others. Actually, the best example of communism is friendship. DirkvdM 07:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Pengyou, camaraderie, etc. but living in a very extensive network of communes can work, too. In a city-states I think this is especially applicable....I'm thinking of environments like the HDB with their common void decks, markets and corridors...Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 10:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• All very complicated, but maybe this idea is worth considering, since self-interest is always a very potent force. Communism is (widely held to be) about redistributing capital (money and stuff). On this basis, you might expect that people with little stuff or money might think it was a good thing. Similarly, people with lots of stuff and money want to keep it, so they might think communism is a bad thing. Now, there are of course more people without stuff, than there are people with stuff. But, almost all the people who own newspapers, TV stations or politicians have lots of stuff. They can therefore try to use their power to say communism is Bad. In fact, the amount of energy put into saying communism is Bad suggests that some of the people (with stuff) thought there was a really good chance that other people (without stuff) would want communism, but that it was possible to influence them by putting out real facts, or lies (according to your opinion) about life under communism. Notinasnaid 11:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Well that's a great theory on paper but the facts are that the people who have a lot know that the way to keep a lot is to appease the people that don't have a lot with actions and material goods and not (just) words. Even though it might be through taxes and welfare the haves even in this country pay the bills of the have nots. There are exceptions and accidents and other problems but for the great majority of cases in this country the haves provide a far greater portion of what thay can have than is provided to the poor Communists by the wealthy Communist. ...IMHO (Talk) 13:55, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Sephira (goddess)

When you type 'Sephira' into the search bar one of the results is a sentence stating that Sephira was a Spanish goddess of intelligence and creativity. However, there is no entry with further information on this site, nor can I find any mention of this goddess or pantheon anywhere else... so my question is, where did this information come from? Yes, this is important to me.

--Elara

Sephira is a Hebrew term meaning to count or number. Try Sefirot, Sephiroth, Sefira, etc. Most of these refer to enumeration (such as the parts of the Trinity in Christian faith) that constitute the whole meaning of God (when taken together) in a particular context. ...IMHO (Talk) 09:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. On the page for the Tales of Symphonia anime, it says that "Many legends and works inspire the game’s story... Even obscure characters such as Sephira of Spanish mythology make brief appearances." This led me to here, where it describes "Sephira: Sephira was the Spanish Goddess of intelligence and creativity. Also, in Hebrew Sephira is an alternate spelling for Sephirah or Sefira, one of the ten Sephirot, or mystical “Divine Emanations” in the Kabbalah of Judaism." Hmmm. A Google search turned up mostly mirrors of Wikipedia, and surprisingly, back to Wikipedia, to an unusual place; List of montes on Venus, which lists Sephira Mons as coming from "the Spanish Goddess of intelligence and creativity." This appears to have been taken from here, but i can't get any further. Sorry. Hope this can help someone go further in tracking the mystery of this unsourced statement. СПУТНИК^{CCC P} 16:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• Sophia =wisdom and is seen as feminine,particularly I think in the Greek Orthodox religion,hotclaws**==(217.39.10.51 17:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC))

  I don't know why the discussion jumped from Sephira to Sophia, but the "Holy Wisdom of God" is generally seen to refer to Jesus Christ, from 1 Cor. 24: but to those who are called, Jews and Greeks alike, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God. Jesus is generally not seen as feminine, also not in the Greek Orthodox Churches. --Lambiam^Talk 20:35, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Just as computer games adopt themes and characters from virtually anywhere I am not surprised there might be multiple references (and apparent competing sources) for the true meaning of the word Sephira or even some created intentionally for the express purpose of desecrating the original meaning. A historical document check is the only way I see of resolving this apparent inconsistency ...IMHO (Talk) 04:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

JERMAINE DUPRI

CAN I HAVE A LIST OF ALL THE SONGS THAT JERMAINE DUPRI HAS PRODUCED TO DATE???

Only if you promise to stop SHOUTING at us. JackofOz 12:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Please don't type in ALL CAPS. But concerning your question, you can usually just type in the name of the said artist and there is usually a section that contains a list of their works. schyler 12:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

sorry< my caps key is stuck and i didn"t know i can use the shift key to make lowercase letters> can i have the list< please?

Click the links in my earlier post. schyler 20:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Duke Magnus II of Sachsen -Lauenburg and wife Princess Sofia (Gustavsdotter) Vasa

I would like to know any information on Duke Magnus II of Sachsen-Lauenburg (1543-1603) . I would also like to know if there are any pictures of him? He was married to Princess Sofia Gustavsdotter (Vasa) ( daughter to King Gustav Vasa I (KIng of Sweden) and Margareta -second wife of King Gustav Vasa.

They had a son Gustaf af Sachsen - Lauenburg born 1570 and died 1597. He had a wife Anna Knutsdotter Lilllie and they had a son Gustav Gustafsson Rutenkrantz (1590-)

What confuses me is that in some places Duke Magnus is listed as Magnus II and others Magnus III . Now , was Princess Sofia married to a Magnus II of Sachsen - Lauenburg or Magnus III of Sachsen- Lauenburg?

All we seem to have on Wikipedia is Magnus I, Duke of Saxe-Lauenburg (who died in 1543), and the list on Duchy of Lauenburg, which has only this one Magnus. But perhaps that might be somewhere to start. Adam Bishop 20:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Jacques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris

I have been trying for several weeks, to find a recording of the soundtrack from Jacques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris - and whilst I am able to find very many copies of this they sound nothing like the copy I grew up listening to.

The LP I remember listening to in the late 70's early 80's was comprised of the songs predominatly featured in this musical but with one difference - they were performed by a woman with a deep, sensuous jazz club voice - deep, husky, laid back - you know the sound I am talking about!! For some reason I have the name Edith Piaff in my head and can't help thinking that the title was something like - "Edith Piaff Sings Jaques Brel is Alive and Well.. etc". I was just a kid at the time so my recollection is poor to say the least, none of my family have been able to assist, the LP is of course lost forever....

Please guys and gals - any assistance would be great!! And any suggestions of where else to look would also be appreciated.

Thanks for taking the time to consider my email. Best regards Mithril

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jacques_Brel"

(duplication of question removed)

According to our articles, Edith Piaf died in 1963, whereas the Jacques Brel entry indicates that JB Is Alive ... did not premiere until 1968, so it seems unlikely that she could have performed the musical. The Edith Piaf entry at The All Music Guide shows many songwriters under "Performed Songs By", however Jacques Brel is not one of them. If you further search the AMG for any albums entitled "Jacque Brel Is Alive ..." (sorry, that's just too much to type), you will find dozens, including mention of the first original cast recording from 1968, under which it states "[...]the reedy-voiced Elly Stone, who recalled Edith Piaf." Unfortunately, this album appears to be out of print. You might want to search at used record stores, on the 'net or in the real world. -- LarryMac 14:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

It's not out of print. Here's the Amazon link. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

salary

can anyone tell me what is the average income of a voice actor? some sources say $2000 for 8 commericals and others just say things like not a whole lot.

Salaries for VAs vary depending on the product being produced. During a seminar I attended a while back with an industry professional, for animation work the rate can run from upwards of $300 per half-hour episode of a new series, down to half that roughly for doing a dub. Having said that, it appears I need to move to LA, judging from this article which states the salary for union members has a base of about $600 an hour. Tony Fox (speak) 16:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Regional Symbols

I asked this a few days ago and got referred to FotW, but that didn't go anywhere so I'm asking again. If you know any visual symbols for a Chinese province, autonomous entity, city, large region (the West, the South, Manchuria, etc.), ethnic, cultural, or linguistic group, or any other sort of inter- or subprovinical cultural area, I'd like to know. I'm especially interested in traditional or at least pre-PRC things. Any sort of symbol, like a flag, crest, particular plant or animal, or even just a color or colors, is fine. -- 207.255.69.226 18:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Didn't I answer this a few days ago? They don't have any. -- Миборовский 21:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Marchese Dias Torqas, Viceroy of Naples

We have inherited from grandparents in Norway a painting of Marchese Dias Torqas (Torgas?), Viceroy of Naples. I would love to know who he is but cannot find him in Wikipedia or in any lists of Viceroys of Naples I have come across. Can anyone help?

Thank you Jennifer

Perhaps you should try using the title Margravio instead of Marchese. Russian F 20:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Antonio Álvarez Osorio, viceroy from 1672-1675, was the Marqués de Astorga, which in Italian would be Marchese di Astorga. You are probably misreading di Astorga as Dias Torgas. --Cam 20:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Does this look like the guy in your painting? --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

According to the description, that painting's inscribed with the year 1775; that must be a later marques. --Cam 20:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

On this page in Spanish we find a reference (in Italian) to one "Antonio Pietro Alvarez Osorio Gomez Davila e Toledo, marchese di Astorga di Velada", apparently ambassador in Rome in early 1671, who is undoubtedly the same person. On this page in Spanish we can read that he only became marquis after a succession problem with four contenders, the previous marquis having died in 1659 without a male descendant. Our friend then apparently was already Marquis of San Román. We also find that he died in 1689 without descendants. Further (somewhat undigested) genealogical information is in this Word document: [6]. --Lambiam^Talk 21:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

State Schools

Which article tells me when the state started providing schools? --Username132 (talk) 21:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Which state? Emmett5 21:33, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

History of Education in the United States.Patchouli 23:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Or maybe Education in India. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 00:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Education in Rwanda anyone? --Downunda 00:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• Education in the Netherlands. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Sirhan Sirhan's Parole Hearings

Good evening everyone: I have a question that might seem a little macabre, but, nevertheless it is very serious. I am doing a very detailed report about Sirhan Sirhan and would like to view his parole hearings if at possible. However, I don't know if they are made available to the public. My question is, "Does anyone know where I can either buy or borrow them?" I've checked at the local libraries in my area and none seem to have them. I suppose I could always contact the California Department of Corrections . . . As always, any and all information is greatly appreciated :-) --Cross31 21:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, don't know how neutral that article is; anyone reading it is left with the impression that Sirhan Sirhan most likely did not commit the assassination. As for reading the transcript of his parole hearings, your best bet is probably to contact the parole board. You might also try asking a reference librarian at the library of a law school in California. --Mathew5000 14:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

U.S. House to Presidency

Has there been a United States president who has gone straight from the House of Representatives to the White House?Patchouli 22:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Definitely not in the past 50 years...beyond that I'd have to do some research. Loomis 23:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

There don't seem to be any; the closest looks like James K. Polk, who was five years out of the House when elected. —Zero Gravitas 01:48, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

However, one President went from President to the House of Representatives - John Quincy Adams. User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Abraham Lincoln. Though at the time of his presidential campaign, he wasn't an elected member of Congress or any other legislature, he did serve one term in the US House of Representatives in the late 1840s. --Revolución hablar ver 02:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Henry Clay tried in 1824 but lost (sort of) to John Quincy Adams -- Mwalcoff 03:48, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Jefferson Davis adoption story

Did Jefferson Davis really adopt a black son? Seems contradictory, for someone so racist and the President of the Confederacy, a regime based upon the continuance of the forced slavery of all blacks in the South, would adopt a child of a skin color he hated...yet the story persists, both in this article and here --Revolución hablar ver 02:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Whoa! It's not at all good practice to assume that Jefferson Davis disliked, much less hated, black people. The issues were tremendously complex, and Davis himself was split on the matter. He certainly didn't think that he was fighting to preserve slavery, although that was an issue, and people don't cease to change the moment their time in the historical spotlight ends. He could well have changed his mind entirely, and it's never a particularly safe thing to equate the causes with the leaders of the causes. That said, I don't know if he did adopt a black son, and I do find it unlikely, although he was a devoted father who was heartbroken when his own son died in childhood. According to reports, that caused him far more grief than the loss of the war. Geogre 02:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... about the best thing I could find is this (google "Jim Limber") for more. There are few references online for this story, and almost all are decidely pro-Davis. The account may have some basis in truth, but it would be an exxageration I think to say he was adopted. Apparently there's a portrait of "Jim Limber" at the Museum of the Confederacy in Richmond, Virginia (though I would be very surprised if this wasn't an "imagined" modern-day pinting). I guess they would be a good place to e-mail for more info. Oh, and someone posted this photograph to a genealogy messageboard.--Pharos 03:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

It's easier to be pro-Davis than to be pro-Confederacy, I'd say, as he was never a "fire breather" or one of the ones chomping at the bit for slavery's preservation. There were surprising people who wanted to get rid of slavery, but "not now." (Stonewall Jackson, for example, believed that slavery was going away...but not now.) There was on general reprimanded for sending a letter to Richmond advocating the immediate freeing of the slaves and their arming. However, the nasty racists who attach themselves to this element of history make it hard to research cleanly or present honestly. Geogre 13:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Puerto Rico's status in the UN

What status does Puerto Rico have in the United Nations? --Revolución hablar ver 03:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

See the section "Puerto Rico's political status and international law" in the article Puerto Rico, where this is explained in some detail. --Canley 04:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

June 29

Political compass questionaire

Anyone brave enough to send letters or faxes or emails to all of the politicians asking what their answers to the questions reveal their true political profile to be? ...IMHO (Talk) 04:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Why would politicians answer it (assuming they don't had done the test allready)? And even if they did answer it, don't you think that they would lie? Flamarande 09:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Why don't you tell us what you think about politicians, Flamarande. And then, I'd be interested in knowing why you're interested in politics. JackofOz 10:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Football at the 2008 Summer Olympics

Hello, can you say me, when the qualification for this tournament (Football at the 2008 Summer Olympics) start, and can you give me a list with all games of the preliminaries? Thank you and greets from Germany 84.186.90.23 08:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Where do nomads get their food?

Hello, I really enjoy your site! I have been pondering this question, what do you call people who eat only meat? Secondly, where do nomads get their food? Do they kill off a lamb once in a while, and where do they get their veggies? If they only eat meat, would they not die of meat-poisoning? And do they carry chicken with them for the eggs? Thank you in advance!--Kaasje 09:40, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Present-day nomads may get their food from Wal-Mart. Nomads from hunter-gatherer societies got their food by hunting and gathering. --Lambiam^Talk 10:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

If you only eat meat, I guess you'd be a carnivore. Or a meatatarian. You would die, eventually, of some kind of vitamin deficiency, though; perhaps scurvy, or rickets. It's basically an Atkins diet, without the celery and egg whites (ie, eventually fatal). Proto///type 11:40, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Even moderate amounts of (raw) animal liver such as calf liver and fish liver will be sufficient supplies of vitamins A, B, C and D. Heating will destroy much of the vitamin C. Vitamin E is more problematic for meatonliers, but if you eat 1 kilogram of meat a day you will get more than enough to avoid a deficiency. --Lambiam^Talk 12:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Mmmmm, raw fish liver.  ;) Proto///type 13:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

World poulation if no wars/disease

Hi

I wonder if anyone could give an estimated guess (I reliase it's a question riddled with variables) as to what the population of the world might be had there not been any wars, majoy diseases, catastrophes etc?

Thanks

Joe

Consider populations of wild animals: typically, the population is limited by disease, starvation or predators. (Natural disaster is so rare to generally exclude). There isn't really anything else: talking of ideas like "limited by territory" really means the animal breeds more, but disease, starvation or predators kill every animal in some areas. In humans it is the same, except that we've removed the predators, and we sometimes kill each other (in effect, we are the replacement predators). So if we removed all other limits on our fecundity you can be sure that starvation (or inward predation) would have done its bit to limit the population, but perhaps not before we had so overworked the land we could no longer sustain ourselves at all. Of course in the enlightened modern age, humanity is fundamentally different. Notinasnaid 11:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

At a guess, not much different than currently. Consider that World War II was the most recent war to affect the population on a global scale (the estimated 30ish million deaths were around 1% of the total population). That's a crazy huge number, and I don't want to denigrate it, but given that the question is "riddled with variables", you're not going to be realistically estimating to within 1% of a value, so you can basically ignore this. Also consider that, at least in the US, the end of WWII sparked the baby boom, a population jump that might not have occurred without the societal pressures of the war. (For what it's worth, the 1918 influenza epidemic killed around 3% of the world's population; however, this was probably less biased towards killing the breeding portion of the population)

The other major point that I see, which you've not indicated, is the starvation bit mentioned above. It becomes increasingly difficult to estimate how much more pressure the food supply (and so forth) could have sustained. Suddenly add 100 million to the population in 1919, and could then-current technology have not only fed (and so forth) them, but also allowed for a comparable population growth rate? Beats me. — Lomn | Talk 13:09, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, see Malthus (or Thomas Malthus) for the Malthusian hypothesis. However, Germs, Guns, and Steel argues, along with a number of other recent works, that there is just no way that we avoid disease when population pressures grow, as, if nothing else, population density makes us move, and moving puts us in the realm of new pathogens. Geogre 13:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Difference between terms

Hi all. Hope you are well. What, if anything, is the difference between a legal requirement, and a statutory requirement? I'm having issues finding this. Thanks. Proto///type 11:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

In most context these are synonyms. A statute is often just another term used for a law. However, the word can also be used for a (formal, written) rule of a corporation or other organization, and requirements of that kind of statute are not in general requirements of law. --Lambiam^Talk 11:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

It depends on the context. A "legal requirement" could mean a number of different things, including "we are doing this because our lawyers told us to and we don't really know why". A statute is generally a law passed by the legislature. Often there are various types of secondary legislation made under the authority of a statute. To take one example in Canada, there is the Marine Transportation Security Act (a statute) and the Marine Transportation Security Regulations (secondary legislation). The Regulations are more detailed, and they are made by the Governor in Council pursuant to section 51 of the statute. If you are required to do something by a provision of the Act, you could call that a statutory requirement. But if you are required to do something by a provision of the Regulations, you wouldn't call it a statutory requirement but you might well call it a legal requirement. However "legal requirement" might refer to a host of other things as well, for example a requirement under a contract. The term is often used to mean something that is "legally prudent" although not technically required. I don't agree with the person who said that these terms are in most contexts synonyms. --Mathew5000 13:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Book publishing

I'm curious as to what the numbers shown on the publishing history page of most books signify. I assume they are something to do with the stile of print, but I'm not sure. I can't look it up on Wikipedis because I don't even know the proper name of these numbers ! Two examples I have recently seen are: 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 and 1 3 5 7 9 2 4 6 8 10.

RASAM 12:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

These numbers indicate which reprint the book is part of, and arranging them like this enables the publisher or printer to indicate this with the minimum amount of work, i.e. they simply delete one digit for each print run. When copy is centred, reprints can be indicated by a centred line of alternating figures; each digit stands for the number of the reprint. One figure is deleted with each subsequent printing so that the smallest remaining digit marks the reprint number. When copy is full left, figures are in descending order. --Shantavira 12:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

It's particularly easy when you store the film images used to create printing plates. (These tend to be stored rather than plates). You can just use masking tape to cover another number, before making a new printing plate. With direct systems that go from computer to printing plate without any film, the technique is lost, and so the style is likely to vanish over time. Notinasnaid 12:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I've always heard it referred to as the impression number. If there are two sets of digits, then the year of printing is indicated as well. The first set of digits, read right to left, indicates the year; the second set, read left to right, indicates the impression number. The following example represents a fourth printing in 1998

06 05 04 03 02 01 00 99 98 4 5 6 7 8 —Wayward ^Talk 13:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

smoking

I would like to have an articles about the effect of smoking

• And you do. See Tobacco smoking. Notinasnaid 12:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

AMI Musicale

Hello, My husband was given an AMI jukebox without the box. It contains sixty 45's, plays continuously until one side of all records have been played, then automatically reverses and plays the other side of all the records. We were told that it came out of a hotel or casino in Las Vegas and was placed in a closet where it played and piped the music throughout (probably just the lobby area). This piece is called AMI Musicale, and we can't find any information on it as to either confirm or deny its usage or origin. If you can help us, we would greatly appreciate it. Thank you so much, Paula Knight Arcadia, Florida

This page lists several models of jukeboxes that were produced by AMI (Automatic Musical Instruments company). Scroll down for the list of models that play 45s. I don't see a "Musicale" listed, but there are many photographs, perhaps you can find your machine that way. --LarryMac 13:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)