Revision as of 14:23, 27 January 2010

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

• WP:RD/H

Main page: Help searching Misplaced Pages

How can I get my question answered?

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

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

January 22

Baseball Rule Question

It is my understanding that if a runner knocks over the catcher and he (the catcher) drops the ball, then the runner is safe at Home Plate.

However, it is also my understanding if the same situation were to happen at third, second or first base, the runner would be out.

Is there a reason for the special exemption at home plate? Or is there some lacking in my understanding?74.104.99.206 (talk) 04:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Sliding into a fielder while attempting to reach a base is typically not a rules violation. In fact, typically on a double play situation, the runner coming from first to second will slide hard into the base, hoping to throw the pivot man's timing off or even causing him to tumble. Sliding out of the base path for that purpose, though, is against the rules. Reaching out and slapping at the ball (as A-Rod did in the 2004 ALCS) is against the rules, and the batter/runner will be called out for it. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

You might be thinking of interference. If a runner prevents a fielder from fielding a batted ball, he is called out, unless he is legally occupying a base and the interference was unintentional, in the umpire's judgment. (Rule 7.08(b)) The photo of Cobb was on a thrown ball from the catcher as he was trying to nail Cobb stealing third. If it were on a batted ball, Cobb might have been called out; or if he interfered with the third baseman's attempt to throw the ball elsewhere, he would have been called out. If you think about it, a play at the plate is typically always on a throw. Then it becomes like the Cobb situation except it's at home. If the batter hits a Baltimore chop and the runner from third comes barreling in on the catcher while he's trying to field the ball, the runner would be called out for interference. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Add: if the catcher or other fielder blocks the runner from reaching base, and it is judged to be unnecessary for the fielder / catcher to complete the play (catch the ball or tag the runner), the fielder / catcher may violate the rules, resulting in the runner being awarded the base. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:23, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. That's obstruction. One way to put it is, if a fielder gets in the way of a batter/runner and doesn't have the ball, the batter/runner can be awarded the next base, or maybe more, depending the umpire's assessment of the situation. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 07:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

By the way, Bugs has been lurking this board for about 3 years now just waiting for this question :) Shadowjams (talk) 10:50, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Or ANY baseball question. Bring it on! :) Although sports questions usually turn up in the entertainment ref desk, but that's a minor point. :) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

A-Rod also interfered with a play against the Blue Jays last year or the year before, he was running behind the shortstop and yelled something, so the shortstop missed the ball. But that's not specifically against the rules, so nothing happened. Jerk. Adam Bishop (talk) 23:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I think that technically it would be. When I say "will be called", I'm optimistically assuming the ump will see it and do his job. That doesn't mean he necessarily will. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 23:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Umpire Bill Klem famously said "It ain't nothin' till I call it" when asked about his interpretation of baseball's rules. Some people find this aspect of baseball part of its charm, others find it somewhat arbitrary and infuriating. --Jayron32 05:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

This one's for you, Baseball Bugs: What's wrong with a left fielder throwing his hat at a fly ball, so as to stop it from going over the wall for a home run? DOR (HK) (talk) 05:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

fourth auction by Jay Leno

By any chance, is Jay Leno going to auction another Harley-Davidson motorcycle with the proceeds going to the Haiti relief efforts?24.90.204.234 (talk) 07:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

As with just about every thing you can imagine, there is, indeed, some chance that might happen. All we need is evidence. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Where can the evidence be found?24.90.204.234 (talk) 02:51, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

"modern" technological differences in everyday life at any time before, say, 1600 (back to, say, 450 BC)

I've read a lot about Shakespeare's England and Jesus's/Paul's Judea/Roman Empire, and recently it occurred to me that there were few if any differences between the two in terms of technological advances affecting everyday life (note: I am NOT referring to politics or social systems, economics, racism, sexism, imperialism, etc., except as they are indirectly related to technology and everyday life of average common people). Researching inventions on Misplaced Pages, it seemed to me that only armaments and printing changed much; the only other things I could find or think of were clocks and (in the 1700s) stoves. (Oh, yeah -- and stirrups.)

So: What technological differences were there between, say, 1600 and the previous 2000 years, anywhere, that made daily life "more modern" than it had been since, say, the dawn of the Greeks?

I think most people would be surprised to discover that the answer is "not many." Wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.45.118 (talk) 11:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

The timeline of historic inventions may be of use here. Glassblowing was devised in the first century BC, porcelain was widely produced in East Asia by 1600 but was still rare and expensive in Europe. Pencils, wheelbarrows and horseshoes were all everyday items either invented in this time period or very rare in the Roman Empire. Warofdreams talk 11:36, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Interesting question. You say "everyday life", I would be surprised if many 'ordinary' people in England had access to a clock in Shakespeares' England. In many ways the Romans appear to have been more advanced that the English of those days. The Dark Ages have a lot to answer for. Much technology was lost. I imagine that mathematics, once Arabic numerals were introduced would have quiclky become far more advanced than Roman days. (again not in 'everyday' life) 220.101.28.25 (talk) 12:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I also think the OP doesn't perhaps appreciate how significant the development of the Gutenberg printing press was Nil Einne (talk) 13:42, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually most people in Shakespeare's England would have had access to a clock. Not one of their own, of course, but they would have been able to see the one on their church tower, which would be a big technological improvement over Roman times. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Nil Einne. I do appreciate the printing press, which was mentioned above. But most people were illiterate. Granted, the vulgar Bible was tremendously influential. As for the rest of printing, I'm not sure it affected everyday common urban life very much till the late 18th century in the west, with the prolifgeration of newspapers. Sometimes I think Ben Franklin was the great avatar of the age! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.48.145 (talk) 13:57, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

How about the chimney, the hourglass (for sailors), Clocks (maybe not in everyone's home, but certainly in some towns), horseshoes as well as other items mentioned above? Googlemeister (talk) 14:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Widespread use of steel and pretty universal use of iron. Much increased use of wind- and waterpower. Ocean-going sailing ships with advanced rigging and stern rudders. Magnetic compass. --15:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Steel wasn't in widespread use until well after 1600. Iron was already commonplace in the Roman era. Windmills were new, but water-power was already widespread under the Romans. Warofdreams talk 15:35, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

What about indoor plumbing? it seems more common in Rome than in Shakespeare's England. 67.51.38.51 (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I expect changes in agricultural methods such as the three-field system and the mouldboard plough would have a big impact on the type and amount of food people ate, and the population that could be supported. Sheep were a big industry around Shakespeares time, with exports of wool. Ship design changed, with a different type of sail, alllowing more trade and longer fishing trips, including exploration. What were big technological developments at the time seem mundane to us now. There were also developments in military methods that would have affected who was in power: the longbow, the use of gunpowder in the West, cannon and guns. The development of castles, armour for knights, chain mail, and probably many others. 84.13.39.208 (talk) 00:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about that. The bible was of course important. The bible was of course important. However more importantly, even if you are literate, it doesn't mean the availability of printed material would be of no benefit to you. If you are seeking help from someone who is literate for example. And printing of course freed up scribes to do other things. I know that you're excluding social etc changes but my view is that printing likely did have some very major effects on the lives of everyday people given the widespread changes it caused. Nil Einne (talk) 06:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

related question to the above: in what decades did the modern technological era reach a "tipping point" for the daily lives of numerous common people?

Given that the answer up to 1600 is "not much," approximately what later decades mark the tipping point toward great changes in everyday life (at least in the west) due to technology (and, again, excluding politics, social systems, etc., except as related to everyday common techology)? My guess is 1790-1810 or thereabouts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.45.118 (talk) 11:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I feel it is unlikely you could point to a 'tipping point', especially to a period of 20  years.(I could certainly be wrong!) Your previous question mentioned printing, and that, when applied to the spread of knowledge, would have had a major effect on progress. The re-invention of good sanitation ie. toilets and sewerage systems would have had a major impact, though likely came much later than 1810. 220.101.28.25 (talk) 12:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll go with the 1950s. After the last major conflict the world has ever known, scientists and engineers got down to brass taxes and designed cars, TVs, fridges, ovens, telephones, and central heating for the everyman. Throw in microwaves, CD players, personal computers, the internet, digital cable, and HDTV from the 80s to now, and we've got mostly everything. And lets not forget about bulk travel with the 747 (1969) and its kin. Or video games becoming increasingly mainstream from 1985 to 2005. Vranak (talk) 12:40, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

"Brass taxes" is an amusing eggcorn with a folk etymology, but the usual expression is "brass tacks" :-). 87.81.230.195 (talk) 23:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Amusing indeed! Thanks! Vranak (talk) 12:53, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Vranak. Refrigerators are a 1920s thing. Also, I agree with you that any recent decade is unbelievable relative to the past, but I'm asking: when did that START happening, technologically, in everyday life? It wasn't true for Shakespeare, but: Lincoln did not have lightbulbs ... but he DID have trains, and that's a big deal. I'd have to put the answer as pre-Lincoln, but then, it's not fair to answer my own question! I'm confident that the answer must lie in the early industrial revolution (Lincoln probably felt very, very modern getting telegraphs), but I'm not sure when. The "factory"-related advances of the second half of the 18th century were extremely influential in regard to what I'm asking, and the steam engine and cotton gin were huge. So I think the answer must lie between 1750-1850. Sorry if I'm closed-minded to later-dated answers; I'd love to hear other opinions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.48.145 (talk) 12:57, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Commercial fridge and freezer units, which go by many other names, were in use for almost 40 years prior to the common home models. They used toxic gas systems, which occasionally leaked, making them unsafe for home use. Practical household refrigerators were introduced in 1915 and gained wider acceptance in the United States in the 1930s as prices fell and non-toxic, non-flammable synthetic refrigerants such as Freon or R-12 were introduced. It is notable that while 60% of households in the US owned a refrigerator by the 1930s, it was not until 40 years later, in the 1970s, that the refrigerator achieved a similar level of penetration in the United Kingdom. Vranak (talk) 14:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

"Home electric refrigerators, of which there were only 27,000 in 1923, increased to 755,000 in just five years." --"America and the Jazz Age" by F.W. Boardman, Henry Z. Walck Inc., 1968, p. 58. That's an increase of 2700% from 1923-28 -- sounds like a tipping point to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.48.145 (talk) 14:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

But remember that electric refrigerators didn't introduce a novel amenity, they were merely a technological improvement over the older and widely used Icebox. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 00:03, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I'd say 75% saturation has shown that a technology has reached full maturity. So the tipping point would be when, let's say, 50% of families above the poverty line own a computer, or a cell phone, or a fridge. Vranak (talk) 19:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Another way to put my question (and having written this, it occurs to me that I am necessarily talking about urban life, mostly):

Supose you were a lazy novelist, who researched an era's/place's politics/economics, but didn't want to worry about common everyday life so much. What is the earliest decade in which you could set a novel that (except for clocks, pencils, printing, stirrups, glassblowing) would be basically the same as any other era for the previous 2000 (or even 2500) years? See what I'm saying? Everyday life was pretty much the same in terms of "conveniences" and modernizations for roughly 2000 years, I think ... When did that rapidly change? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.48.145 (talk) 13:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I think the question is totally subjective and any "answer" is of questionable significance. Bus stop (talk) 13:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, then, I'll make it more objective: The human race came into existence sometime in the past 150,000 years. Civilization, as usually defined, began in about 4000 BCE. The industrial revolution, as usually defined, began sometime in the past 250 years. Question: At what point did the industrial revolution begin to so significantly effect everyday life for common urban people in the west that their daily lives were substantially different from the daily lives of their predecessors? Yes, I know that "substantially different" is qualitative, but, for example, in regard to technology, as mentioned above, there was little difference between, say, Shakespeare's daily life in 1599 and Saint Paul's life in 50 CE. So the answer to the question DOES in fact lie sometime afterwards, even if defined only in terms of a decades-long scope. And, anyway, why worry about the "significance" of the answer? Relative to WHAT? Your answer to THAT is probably totally subjective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.48.145 (talk) 14:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I can answer a much simpler question -- namely, the decade when proclaimed labor-saving gadgets really started saving significant labor for middle-class women in the United States of America was basically the 1920's. In Victorian times, just doing the laundry in a middle-class family's household was pretty much an all-day task that had to be done once a week, and which could not realistically be done by one woman unless she was uncorseted, work-hardened, and had quite muscular arms (something which was the antithesis of the ideal of a middle-class Victorian lady). For that and other reasons, the middle-class lifestyle required hiring lower-class servants in Victorian times. However, by the end of the 1920s, in households in the U.S. which had electricity and could afford to buy a washing machine, a refrigerator, and a few other items, the housework could often realistically be done by one woman in a manner which was more or less consistent with 1920s ideas of middle-class womanhood (which had changed from Victorian ideas of middle-class womanhood, of course). That's part of why hiring servants was then starting to become more of an upper-class thing than an ordinary middle-class thing... AnonMoos (talk) 14:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

There was a 1980s TV series called Connections that talked about the evolution of technology. It's really hard to say that one particular time was more significant than another, because new technology opens the door to more new technology. But aside from sanitation and indoor plumbing, which were obviously very important to improvement of lifestyle, there are two basic areas I can think of that were truly revolutionary: mobility and communication. The development of engines made steamships, trains, automobiles and airplanes possible. The development of electronics made the telegraph, telephone, radio, and television possible. The Model T Ford, for example, made it possible for people to go places and do things they hadn't been able to do before. But that was driven by rising incomes and falling prices. All of that came out of the Industrial Revolution. It occurs to me that if cars and phones and radios were available 2,000 years ago, we would probably all be speaking Latin today (in a way, we are, with the proliferation of English). The industrial revolution was certainly a tipping point. The 1950s (also a time of prosperity - note that this is not a coincidence) was when labor-saving devices got a lot of emphasis. But you could make the case that the 1920s, with most everyone having a car and a radio, were the most obvious "tipping point". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

The TV series was James Burke's Connections. I'd recommend anyone interested in this thread to watch it or probably easier) read the book, alongside Jacob Bronowski's The Ascent of Man and Kenneth Clark's Civilisation. DuncanHill (talk) 17:23, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't that depend where they were invented and how they spread? If they were invented in say China or India and become widely popular there before spreading out, I'm not so sure we would be speaking Latin. Nil Einne (talk) 05:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

There's an interesting theory linking Kondratiev waves with technological innovation and adoption (see under Kondratiev wave#Tentative explanations of the cycle). If the theory holds, then you just need to find the wave which you think represents a significant change, and the "tipping point" where the innovations become part of the daily lives of most people in the advanced capitalist countries will be near the end of the wave. Warofdreams talk 15:44, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

In the late 19th century, the promise of technological revolution was there, but I don't think one could say it was really upon people. The interwar period (1917-1933) is probably a good place to locate when the promise really played out in spades, not just for a few guys at the top, but for a lot of other people as well. Of course, the end of this was marred by the Great Depression, which certainly cut down the individual influences a lot—which is why the 1950s look appealing as a second candidate, because things get really started up again in that direction, and even more so, after World War II. I would say there isn't one tipping point, but a series of decades, stretching from maybe the 1860s through 1950, where the Western world transforms rather radically in its relationship to technology. (As for the rest of the world, that's a different question, and more difficult.) --Mr.98 (talk) 15:50, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

There is a tendency to lump together vastly different models of some device or differences usages of some technology, which to the users back in the day would have seemed very different. Technological advances did not start with the 19th century or with the industrial revolution. The soldier, sailor, metallurgist, farmer, carpenter, brewer, clothier, cook, or smith of 450 BC would be amazed by the technological advances of 1600 AD. The peasant scratching out a meager existence in a stone hut in some remote area might have some similarities, but many people enjoyed very different circumstances from the earlier period. Lamps in 1600 were better than lamps in 450 BC, even though both burned fuel. Fireplaces in 1600 were better than the earlier ones. Saddles and wagons were better.Shoes and boots were better. Sailing ships were better. Kitchens had better cooking arrangements. Farm implements were better. Writing media were better, not to mention printing. Do not discount the commonality of literacy and the circulation of printed materials among the common people in the 1600's. Books were better than scrolls. Libraries were more common. The dyeing of fabric was better. The extraction of metals was better. More was known of chemistry and medicine. Weapons were vastly more deadly. The 1632 series series of alternative history novels and the collaborative research "tech manuals" document how good the technology was in the early 1600's in Europe. Edison (talk) 17:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

That was a major point of Connections, that technological progress is a continuum. The Roman innovations of roads and aquaducts and such probably made Roman life much better than it had been 500 years earlier. But you're right, the growth of literacy probably had a great deal to do with the growth in technology. But that growth in literacy was also driven by need. Everything interconnects. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 17:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

It's true that technological advance is continuous, but there is a strong argument that in the last 150 years, the changes have been both more rapid and have had more impact on most people's lives than ever before. The average human being did roughly the same sorts of things in the same sorts of ways for many centuries—a common worker in the 18th century would have been able to make sense of what a common worker in the 17th and 16th century did, even if some aspects of it had improved in many ways, and vice versa. I do not think the same can be said for someone in the 20th century, and the 18th, or even much of the 19th. Our lives have become more defined by technology over time, and our economies, morales, systems of government, and so forth have reflected that. To say that improvement has been a continuum misses a great deal of subtlety. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The rate of technological development seems to follow a roughly exponential curve. Exponential curves don't really have tipping points. If you plot them it looks like there is a fairly sudden change between an almost flat line and an almost vertical line not far from the end. However, if you then plot just the first half of the curve and adjust the scales so they have they take up the same space you will, again, see a fairly sudden change not far from the end - but that's right in the middle of the previous plot. What that means is that the tipping point will always seem to be a short while ago, regardless of when you ask the question. Judging by the above discussion, people in 2010 think the tipping point was around 60 years ago. People in 1610 would have probably thought much the same thing. --Tango (talk) 17:50, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

This is an interesting thread, and I don't have much to add, except to observe that the rapid change we saw in the United States in the 1920s (widespread adoption of private cars and labor-saving household appliances by most households) didn't really come for most households in Europe until the 1950s. Obviously, there are many parts of the world today where most households still don't have a car or big electric labor-saving appliances. Marco polo (talk) 18:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

That was mostly due to the economy of the UK for example being smashed-up and exhausted by World Wars I and II. 92.29.130.174 (talk) 12:58, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

What's the place the inquirer has in mind? Not China, Buenos Aires, Tahiti, I'll imagine. But Poland? Paris? Idaho? What class of people are "ordinary" to the inquirer? Is a woman with a college education "ordinary"? She is in my world. How "modern" is a rural house without electricity? Without a telephone? Without a car to get around in? How do you recognize "modernity" anyway?--Wetman (talk) 21:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Good point about the exponential curve, but I don't think people in 1610 would have thought anything about how much more advanced they were than 60 years ago, because I don't think they had a concept of technological progress. If you look at art from around 1610 that shows scenes from the past it is full of anachronisms (biblical characters appear in modern dress, for instance). I don't think we progressed as far as awareness that progress was happening to us until the industrial revolution. This awareness is one possible thing to seize on as a tipping point - the point where progress has crossed the rubicon of being noticable. 81.131.52.170 (talk) 14:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I have the answer: 1899. In that year, Charles H. Duell, Commissioner of the U.S. Office of Patents, apocryphally recommended to his boss, President William McKinley that the Office of Patents be abolished, since "Everything that can be invented has been invented". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

1920s: electric lighting installed in homes, aircraft becoming common, radio, the Talkies. All magical things. Cars were somewhat earlier. 92.29.130.174 (talk) 12:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

There is clearly a geographic element to this. Rich people in Italy: 200 BC? Rich people in England: 1700s? Common people in the US: 1920s? Common people in Norway: 1950s? Common people in Botswana: 1980s? Common people in Mali: 2000s? (note that the exact locations and years are only here to illustrate a point). In general, different inventions are associated with this in different places and times. With the 1930s I'd associate the car, with the 2000s the cellphone. But if I had to pick one invention (which is more a discovery) in the history of mankind, it might be hygiene. Jørgen (talk) 21:55, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

“Numerous” common people? Ah, well, that opens up the question to any possible answer. I’m going to put my money on the 1970s. The main reason is that the Green Revolution was finally delivering results, and roughly a billion people were on the way out of poverty. DOR (HK) (talk) 05:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

"At what point did the industrial revolution begin to so significantly effect everyday life for common urban people in the west that their daily lives were substantially different from the daily lives of their predecessors? "

I think the answer can be found by looking for the first stirrings of opposition to technology, which would be the Arts and Crafts Movement and the luddites. Somewhere in the 19th c., then. 81.131.52.170 (talk) 12:54, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Who was the British Romantic poet who committed "metaphysical suicide" by reading Kant?

Who was the British Romantic poet who committed "metaphysical suicide" by reading Kant? I heard one of the BR poets, suffered from deep depression and turned to the works of the German idealists, which cured his depression, but caused his poetry to suffer. Does anyone know who this poet was, or the story behind it? --Gary123 (talk) 13:17, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Some of what you say works for Coleridge, who wrote that Kant "took possession of me as with a giant's hand" (Biographia 1: 153). It's possible that your "metaphysical suicide" memory is a conflation with a memory of another poet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.51.238 (talk) 15:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Randal Keynes

I heard an interview on National Public Radio this morning with Randal Keynes concerning the upcoming movie, Creation, based on Keynes's book about his great-great-grandfather, Charles Darwin. In the interview, the book is referred to as Creation: Darwin, His Daughter, and Human Evolution, but in our article, the book is referred to as Annie's Box, subtitled Darwin, His Daughter, and Human Evolution. Does the book have different titles in the UK and the US? 67.51.38.51 (talk) 17:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

It appears to have been retitled. Amazon.co.uk shows "Darwin, His Daughter and Human Evolution" (with and without the "Annie's Box") from 2001/2, and "Creation: Darwin, His Daughter & Human Evolution" from November 2009. It also shows "Creation: The True Story of Charles Darwin" from September 2009, which is presumably a different book. --ColinFine (talk) 18:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

WHAAOE: List of works with different titles in the UK and US. --Sean 19:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

When a book is adapted into a film, they frequently rebrand the book to match; I think ColinFine's results are evidence of this, in this case. Incidentally I've seen the film: it's exceedingly sad. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 22:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

18th century diplomacy, envoys, royal letters

Dear wikipedians, I am searching for some information. Specifically, I am looking for wording and phrasing of letters of diplomatic content, sent in the period of 17th-18th century. Preferably something along the lines of discussing war and political conflict. If there are any good examples of this (that are perhaps translated, or easily readable! My German/Spanish/French/etc is not so good... :)

I'd dismiss letters from/to America, as I've read a few of these. They do not often bother with families and bloodlines, as European ones might. I am specifically searching for diplomats and/or letters from members of royal families, sent across borders. Thank you very much for any help. 77.18.0.9 (talk) 18:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Here's two starting points. (1) The London Gazette, which has a searchable online archive, will have war dispatches and similar letters, though I have no idea if royals wrote such things. (2) If you search Google Books for "royal letters" you'll find a lot of public domain stuff, though you would have to wade through and sort domestic from international. It's possible that this is the kind of search that would do best in a national archive rather than online? Best luck, WikiJedits (talk) 21:23, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Dear WikiJedits, thank you! These will likely suffice. What a dreadful (written) tongue they had in the 18th century in England... 77.18.70.237 (talk) 12:33, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Child support. How about elderly parent support?

Most of us have an idea what child support is. Here's the Misplaced Pages article on it (Child support). However, I understand that, at least in Ontario, elderly parents in need can sue their children--at least if the children have the money--for support. Is this true? I tried Google search and got nothing, nor does Category:Family law or Category:Parenting seem to have anything. Thanks for your help.206.130.173.55 (talk) 19:30, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't think you can do that. Where did you hear that? Adam Bishop (talk) 21:03, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I also very much doubt that. What is vaguely related is that in assessing whether the government should pay for long-term care of an elderly person, the spouse's savings are taken into account. This has resulting in a healthy wife being forced to deplete her savings to pay for her husband's care, leaving her with minimal income when her husband eventually died. This came to light because the wife's solution was to legally divorce her husband, removing the state's ability to include her savings in their assessment. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

...for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health... unless it actually comes to me having to make sacrifices to help you, in which case I'll bugger off..... Isn't marriage wonderful? DuncanHill (talk) 21:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually in that case the husband's standard of care wasn't affected - the only thing was whether the wife was forced to pay for it. And the husband agreed with the divorce. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:39, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

According to Global Action on Aging:

For decades, India, Israel and Taiwan have had laws to enforce the obligation to support one's parents. The United Kingdom had such a law from 1601 to 1967. A dozen American states, among them California and Illinois, have some sort of civil law provision for parents and grandparents to sue descendants for support.

This 2002 page on their site, entitled "Children legally obliged to support elderly parents", mentions that a bill was then under discussion in Singapore. BrainyBabe (talk) 23:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

This suggests there are actual legal requirements in some US states, but they are poorly enforced. (Edit see BrainyBabe already mentioned that, missed it.) In fact this suggests 30 states have some sort of law. 21 allow civil action, 12 have criminal penalties and 3 allow both (I presume these are includes in the earlier two since 21+12+3=36 which makes no sense, but 21+12-3=30 which does). Obviously in those that only have criminal penalties, if they are poorly enforced there's little point to the parent. Of course if a parent does require support and there's no legal aide provided and no one is willing to work pro-bono, then suing the child is liable to be difficult anyway. You may also want to search for 'filial responsibility' which appears to be one name for these sort of laws/requirements Nil Einne (talk) 06:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork and Christianity

Why is there no Christian restriction on the consumption of pork when the shared Judeo-Christian literature condemns it? Italy for example is, or has been, a strongly Catholic country and it is well known for salami. Similar examples can be found with Germany, Spain, Poland and so on, all of whom are known for their pork sausage-making traditions.--FinFitFin (talk) 19:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

One of the few Christian churches to impose such a restriction is the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Others probably think it is something specifically Jewish that ended with the Old Testament. Rimush (talk) 19:35, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Most Christians follow the decision of the Council of Jerusalem (reported in the Bible in Acts) in rejecting most old testament Jewish law. See Biblical law in Christianity. Algebraist 19:38, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I think one of the apostles had a revelation or a vision of God displaying "unclean" animals as defined by kosher laws, and informing him that He had cleansed them. That could have been only symbolism, though. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 19:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

It was a symbol, meaning that He had cleansed Gentiles so they could receive the message of the Gospel as well. Rimush (talk) 20:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Even so, did that vision influence the decision of Christianity to abandon kosher laws? Or was that just to further separate themselves from Judaism? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 20:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes it did. Not only did Peter immediately after that vision baptize Gentiles into the Christian faith, but also ate with them (which would have been prohibited under dietary laws). There are many references later in Acts, and in Paul's letters to Christians not needing to follow the Jewish laws. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

This is rapidly running into contentious waters, but according to the late Hyam Maccoby (whose academic speciality embraces precisely this milieu, and whose The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity (1986) I've just re-read), the "Jerusalem Church" (centered on the Pharisee rabbi Jesus's actual disciples and relatives, see also Council of Jerusalem) never ceased to regard itself as a movement within Judaism and disagreed with the abandonment by Saul/Paul (a Greek convert to Judaism, despite what he claimed) of Jewish dietary and other laws, preferring that Gentile "Christians" (a usage not then coined) fully convert.

Peter - allegedly persuaded by the symbolism of the described vision that unconverted Gentiles should be admitted to the movement (utilising the Jewish ceremony of baptism) provided they did not compromise Jewish members' following the laws - took meals with some of Paul's Gentile recruits because Paul had assured the Jerusalem Church that they did follow kosher rules (such "mixed" meals were permissable provided kosher laws were observed at them), but ceased (see the Incident at Antioch) when he realised this might not be true, exposing him to the risk of breaking them himself.

Ultimately Paul's non-Judaistic innovations led to a permanent split between the Jewish-centred Jerusalem Church and his Gentile-oriented faction which due to historical developments became dominant while the other dwindled (becoming the Ebionites). This division's existence was minimised (and the entire nature of the Pharisees misrepresented) by the distortions successively introduced in Paul's own letters, the Acts written by his close associate, and the four canonical Gospels written in a post-Pauline milieu.

Note that this is a very abbreviated and incomplete account of Maccaby's full theses, which I present from a position of personal disinterest, being a Wiccan. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 23:53, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Peter had the vision. It is described in the Book of Acts. Even after the vision, some converted jews stuck with the old ways and were accepted as part of the church, so I don't know that it was just a separation issue. Wrad (talk) 20:50, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

It's not just pork, though, that the Jews are forbidden to eat. There's also shellfish and pigeons, of all things. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

The full Jewish dietary laws are about much more than 'forbidden foods' and the full Jewish law is about much more than diet. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I strongly suspect it's one of the things Paul sacrificed to make Christianity more agreeable to the gentiles. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Assuming even a vague amount of historical accuracy of the book of Acts, Peter's vision predates Paul's ministry. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

That's a lot to assume... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:31, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

The common thread among dietary laws, or at least the smidgen I know about them, is that the "unclean" animals are "bottom feeders": hogs, shellfish, catfish, pigeons, all eat scraps. I would guess that crows would also be considered "unclean", as they will almost literally eat anything. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 21:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Chickens eat scraps - they'll eat anything a pig does, if it's in small enough pieces. DuncanHill (talk) 21:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Then there's no figuring it. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 23:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Our article kashrut states: "Some Jewish scholars have held that these dietary laws should simply be categorized with a group of laws that are considered irrational in that there is no particular explanation for their existence. The reason for this is that it is believed that there are some of God's regulations for mankind that the human mind is not necessarily capable of understanding. Related to this is the idea that the dietary laws were given as a demonstration of God's authority and that man should obey without asking for a reason. This last view has been rejected by most classical and modern Jewish authorities.: DJ Clayworth (talk) 01:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

And of course, there are a lot of Jews who don't follow all of the dietary laws either. Buddy431 (talk) 03:44, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

"FinFitFin" -- One answer which has traditionally been given is that Christianity follows the ethical or moral laws and prohibitions of the Old Testament more thoroughly than the ritual or ceremonial laws and prohibitions (and makes no claim to comprehensively obey the latter). So unless the ban on consumption of pork is for ethical or moral reasons (rather than for ritual purity reasons), then Christians can't necessarily be accused of being inconsistent to their principles when they eat pork. AnonMoos (talk) 03:39, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

More responses to the OP, from the bible itself: 1 Corinthians 8:8-13 makes it clear that blind adherance to dietary restrictions is NOT what it is about for Christians. One should consider the answer to Paul's question "Does what I do cause my brother to fall?" That is, if eating pork among a certain company would interfere with your message as a Christian, then don't do it. If it doesn't matter, then it doesn't matter, so go ahead and eat the pork. It's about considering not only your actions, but the context of your actions. Elsewhere in 1 Corinthians, from verse 6:12 ""Everything is permissible for me"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"—but I will not be mastered by anything." In other words, one has perfect freedom, but that freedom must be considered thoughtfully. Merely being allowed to do something does not mean one should do it. Again, focus on internal, thoughtful consideration of ones actions, their context, and their likely consequences, in the face of absolute freedom. Elsewhere, see also Romans 14:13-21, where Paul says the same thing in even more details; that is in Paul's personal opinion he finds no food unclean, however, he also finds no fault in people who do hold to dietary laws, and that other Christians should consider their company before deciding what to eat or drink. If the people you are with are likely to be offended if you eat pork or drink alcohol, then don't, but not because there is anything in Christianity that forbids it outright, but because one should take care not to offend one's company lest it create a barrier to being a good Witness. Or if Paul's words aren't enough, consider Jesus' words on the matter, see Mark 7:1-23, where Jesus clearly states that "Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. Nothing outside a man can make him 'unclean' by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him 'unclean." and later in that passage "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'?... What comes out of a man is what makes him 'unclean.' For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery..." etc etc. Its all there in the text, several places, and from several important figures (Peter, as mentioned above, and Paul and Jesus as mentioned here). --Jayron32 04:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Blimey Jayron that sounds like the Wiccan Rede - "An it harm none, do what thou wilt"! --TammyMoet (talk) 05:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Not exactly; it's "think about whether it will harm anybody before doing it." Paul's writings make it clear that, because faith in Jesus absolves you from sin, that you have absolute freedom; however, one should not act upon that freedom unmindfully. As a Christian, one goal should be to make more Christians (The Great Commission). In the course of providing one's Christian witness to others, one must carefully consider whether ones actions WILL do harm to one's testimony. That's what Paul is saying. He doesn't say "One must never eat pork" and he doesn't say "Eating pork is always good" What he says is "Look at your environment, and if eating pork will offend those around you, don't eat the pork". He also makes clear that there are things one should never do, like sexual immorality, which is ostensibly a "victimless" sin. Paul makes clear that having the absolute freedom is actually a burden more than a blessing; in that he knows the price paid by Christ to grant that freedom to his believers. The Christian mindset here runs counter to the Jewish one, as noted above, not because it makes things "allowable" that the Jews determine are "forbidden", rather it changes the emphasis from blind adherance to written law (You sin if you eat pork because it is written that you do) to mindful consideration of the results of your actions, and internal processes that lead to those actions (you sin because you lead others to sin, and you sin because your thoughts lead you to sin). So TammyMoet has it 180 degrees backwards, what Paul is saying here si not "If it does no harm, do it." What he is saying is "Before you decide to do it, consider carefully what harm it may have." --Jayron32 06:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I actually don't think I do. Any responsible Wiccan would consider carefully whether a proposed action would harm anyone or anything before doing it, and then if they wanted to abide by the Rede, not do it. --TammyMoet (talk) 08:26, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, I also think there is a difference between different shades of meaning in the word "harm". Paul is speaking almost exlusively in these passages on "harm to one's Witness", that is if your goal is to encourage others to convert to Christianity, then you shouldn't do things that will interfere with that goal. He speaks a lot about this in his writings, about not being a hypocrite, about mindfully considering the culture in which you are a guest, about always judging your actions against the template of "will this harm my Witness to others" or "will this cause my brother to fall". For example, Paul would have no problem with people having a drink or two. He would have a problem with people having a drink or two with someone they known to be an alcoholic, especially if drinking in front of said alcoholic will tend to make that alcoholic then go out and commit sins that he would not otherwise commit if he had never drunk. So, if I drink and commit no sin, then its not a big deal. If I drink with my buddy, who then goes out and drives and kills someone, that is a big deal, even for me, even if I didn't drink and drive myself. Likewise, if I am among a group of people who disapprove of drinking, I shouldn't drink, not because drinking is wrong in God's eyes, but because drinking may cause those people to think badly of me, and THAT would mean they would think badly of Christians, and THAT would be wrong in God's eyes. Lots of people think of "harm" as immediate harm, or direct harm, and Paul is asking us to consider the deeper consequences of our actions. --Jayron32 18:25, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

how US Census does calculations

is this possilbe Census claculations can make a fat error, since this only does things in per centile. The way they calculate for white-asian have less than 2.33:1 ratio, the acceptable caluation will have 3.04:1 ratio, isteve.com have 3.08:1 ratio. First do they weight the numbers in millions when they use numbers in millions then how they change to per centiles. Alot of them would take too long to explain or this site just first calculate the same race, then weight the leftovers. I don't know how census do it, but add/subtract/multiply/divide whon;t only do it. It is too complicate. For ABC/EFG do they only count the ABC/EFG only without counting the ABC/ABC, also the curveball they have is divorce and widows.--209.129.85.4 (talk) 21:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I suspect that the people who run the census know more about statistics than either you or me, and are unlikely to have made such errors. Marnanel (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

And I suspect that any clerical errors would have zero significance to peoples' lives. Vranak (talk) 23:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

That's not true—census data is used for a lot of things in the government, including redistricting, funding, etc. Screwed up census data can have major political effects. It is not done just out of curiosity. --Mr.98 (talk) 23:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Disputes over the 2000 census between the states of Utah and North Carolina, where the disputed difference held the fate of a House of Representatives seat in the balance, dragged on in the courts for years. After the 2000 census, Utah lost a seat and NC gained one, but Utah claimed the census undercounted their eligible citizens because of the large numbers of Mormons who were out of the state on mission trips, but still legal residents. See Utah v. Evans and this link to the original case decision for more details. --Jayron32 04:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

A small clarification: Utah didn't lose a congressional seat after the 2000 census. It had 3 representatives before, and it has 3 now. I'm confident that Jayron32 meant that Utah missed out on a chance to add a fourth seat. (Also, I served a mission for the LDS Church, and I'm not sure I'd call it a "trip." <Wink>) Kingsfold (talk) 17:12, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Small clerical errors, I should hasten to add. Like getting the population of Filipino Americans off by 2%. I shouldn't think anyone will starve to death on that account. Vranak (talk) 12:55, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Missing 80,000 people would hardly qualify as a small error, especially if you missed all 80,000 people from the same state. Such a number could very easily result in shifting congressional allocation, and thus cause some localities to be underrepresented in Congress. There's lots of levels of "serious problem" besides "starving to death". --Jayron32 16:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

The citation in the original post is to work by JJ Huang and CN Le, not work by the US Census Bureau. Having said that, you may want to ask this question at the Mathematics Desk. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

January 23

Controversies around Christianization of Scandinavia

Were any parts of the Christianization of Scandinavia accomplished through violence or controversial methods? NeonMerlin 02:00, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Controversial now, or then? Marnanel (talk) 02:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

It frequently happened in such situations that if a king converted, then he wanted the people that he ruled to convert en masse, and that refusal to convert was interpreted by the king as personal disloyalty to himself. But in most such cases, Christians from outside the society had no coercive powers (unless they were given them by the local king). If you want a much more "controversial" Christianization, then consider the case of the Baltic coasts, where tribes without strong local kings were made the object of a dubious "crusade" by the Livonian knights and Teutonic knights which turned into an ethnic German land-grab and led to the extinction of several Baltic languages and many centuries of German-Slav struggles and ethnic displacements which ended only with the adoption of the Oder-Neisse line... AnonMoos (talk) 03:28, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Most likely at least Olaf I of Norway and Harald I of Denmark in order to convert reluctant areas did resort to force on some occasions, but there are not many sources that touch on that side of these events, as this is very much a case of history being written by the winners. --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Have you read the subsidiary articles, which contain a lot more detail than Christianization of Scandinavia? Our article on Christianisation of Iceland states:

Stefnir violently destroyed sanctuaries and images of the heathen gods -- this made him so unpopular that he was eventually declared an outlaw. ... named Thangbrand managed to convert several prominent Icelandic chieftains, but killed two or three men in the process. Thangbrand returned to Norway in 999 and reported his failure to King Olaf, who immediately adopted a more aggressive stance towards the Icelanders. He refused Icelandic seafarers access to Norwegian ports and took as hostages several Icelanders then dwelling in Norway. This cut off all trade between Iceland and its main trading partner. Some of the hostages taken by King Olaf were the sons of prominent Icelandic chieftains, whom he threated to kill unless the Icelanders accepted Christianity. The Icelandic Commonwealth's limited foreign policy consisted almost entirely of maintaining good relations with Norway. The Christians in Iceland used the King's pressure to step up efforts at conversion. The two rival religions soon divided the country and threatened civil war.

That counts as violent and controversial in my book: not exactly freedom of religion. BrainyBabe (talk) 23:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

What the heck does "freedom of religion" have to do with anything that people thought at the time (as opposed to retroactive anachronistic judging of events of a thousand years ago by the standards of today)??? There were very few people of a thousand years ago who thought that freedom of religion was a virtue in itself or a "positive good" (as opposed to people having an indifferent apathetic tolerance towards foreigners and their bizarre gods, as long as they stayed at a certain distance -- an attitude which was common at the time). And monarchs with strong powers generally greatly preferred religious homogeneity among their subjects (a principle later formalized as "Cuius regio eius religio"). So these people, whatever you may think of their actions, were not hypocrites, nor were they necessarily in violation of commonly-accepted moral standards of their time... AnonMoos (talk) 23:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

The OP asked about "violence or controversial methods" without defining those terms. I provided examples from our articles. I never said the Icelanders were hypocritical, as I am no expert in the "commonly-accepted moral standards of their time". Cutting off trade routes to an isolated island and threatening to kill high-ranking hostages may well have been par for the course. As for freedom of religion, well, by this time the world had heard the phrase "There is no compulsion in religion" (though, admittedly, I don't know if word had got that far north by then). BrainyBabe (talk) 11:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Whatever -- before roughly the late 17th century, only a very few isolated advanced thinkers thought that religious tolerance was a positive virtue (as opposed to a grudging concession to necessity). Feel free to point out instances of brutality and violence which occurred, but it still seems quite absurd to sanctimoniously judge things according to a principle of positive valuation of religious diversity which simply didn't exist in the world until 500 years afterwards.

And contrary to your implications, Muslims did very little towards establishing religious tolerance as a positive virtue (as opposed to a "grudging concession to necessity" or an "indifferent apathetic tolerance towards foreigners and their bizarre gods, as long as they stayed at a certain distance"). The alleged principle of no compulsion in religion did nothing whatever to prevent Muslims from issuing threating threatening letters to rulers of non-Muslim realms telling them to convert to Islam or be conquered (Aslim Taslim), subjecting non-Muslims to extra taxes (jizya), decreeing that non-Muslims can convert to Islam but Muslims are strictly and absolutely forbidden from converting from Islam (defined as "apostasy"), decreeing that Muslim men can marry non-Muslim women but Muslim women are forbidden from marrying non-Muslim men, etc. etc. ad nauseam... AnonMoos (talk) 13:19, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Already in 1573 (a century before the late 17th century), all of Polish and Lithuanian noblemen (not just a very few isolated advanced thinkers) agreed to obey the act of the Warsaw Confederation. Here's a fragment of the document (my translation):

As in our Commonwealth there is a considerable variety within the Christian faith, in order to prevent any harmful turmoil which we have clearly seen in other kingdoms, we promise to each other... that we who differ in faith will maintain peace among us and that for the differences in faith and churches we will not shed blood or punish each other with expropriation, defamation, prison...

— Kpalion 21:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Did that go significantly beyond a grudging concession to necessity? -- AnonMoos (talk) 12:31, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

It would not be controversial in Norway to state that Christianization of this country was accompanied by violence; that seems to be the widely accepted version of the story. Olaf II of Norway, later sainted, was killed during his effort to increase his power / spread Christianity. Also, there has been some (very low-volume) debate about the logo of the Church of Norway lately - it contains two axes, alleged (at least by some) to be a reference to the Christianization of Norway. Jørgen (talk) 15:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Human nature

I vaguely recall an inspiring song about technological progress. It was similar in theme to the Carousel of Progress song, but longer--it talked about technological development, the dream of space travel, and the hope that each day will be better than the ones preceding it. I think it said something about humans exploring the universe and watching other civilizations develop.

I also remember a book that started with a large group of (a hundred?) starving girls in a desert engaging in cannibalism. They were apparently survivors of a death march and were portrayed as smart, cute, and generally admirable. By the end of the book, they had set up a leadership system even more brutal than the one persecuting them, and not one character remains admirable.

Can anybody help identify these two works? I don't remember anything about the titles or the authors; I'm horrible at remembering either. --99.237.234.104 (talk) 05:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

(the song:) I don't recognise this specifically, but there are many filk songs with this sort of theme. If you follow some of the links from that article, you might find it. --ColinFine (talk) 12:55, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

If I'm Conon O'Brian

Let's say I get fired from hosting an evening comedy show on one of the major US television networks, and the network pays me tens of millions of dollars in order to be able to bring back the guy whom I succeeded. Can I get unemployment benefits? Nyttend backup (talk) 06:44, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Most jurisdictions require that you have used up your termination benefits before you can claim amy kind of public assistance. Some categories of employment are also exempt. Bielle (talk) 07:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Au contraire. In Massachusetts at least, unemployment benefits begin at the moment of termination, irrespective of severence pay. My dad was recently laid off, and started collecting unemployment the moment he was terminated, and he's also collecting his severence pay. --Jayron32 16:09, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Bielle said "most jurisdictions", so a different rule in one jurisdiction is not evidence "to the contrary". As I recall, The Tonight Show is shot in California, so the real question would presumably be what their law on this is.

Of course, the real answer is that if you're Conan O'Brian, the Reference Desk cannot provide you with legal advice. We can only answer your question if you're not Conan O'Brien. So there! --Anonymous, 16:26 UTC, January 23, 2010.

Yeah, Conan, stop posting legal questions to the Reference Desk already. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

It's just his cousin Conon, man :)) Rimush (talk) 20:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I see a movie sequel coming: Conan and the Golden Parachute. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 00:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

See my userpage: I don't own a TV, so I'd never really heard of this guy before the recent controversy erupted — thus the misspelling :-) Nyttend (talk) 05:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

See, I thought unemployment benefits in the USA were a federal thing, not a statewide thing. Nyttend backup (talk) 17:15, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Money is provided to the states by the federal government (see Federal Unemployment Tax Act); the states decide how to manage it, much the way that Medicaid works. The federal government does set some broad guidelines, but generally does not interfere with the nitty-gritty of how states decide to distribute their funds. Only a portion of the funds comes from the Federal gov't anyways, much is from the states. So basically, each state has a pool of unemployment insurance cash; some comes from the feds and some comes from their own revenue streams, and then the states decide themselves how to distribute it. See Unemployment_benefits#Federal-State_joint_programs. --Jayron32 18:15, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

A quick glance at the California government's pages on unemployment benefits here and here turns up no mention of severance pay. Best, WikiJedits (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC).

Betty Ong's call on 9/11

I watched on YouTube, the call of Betty Ong with Nydia Gonzalez. I have never been on a plane and I want to know where was she calling from (Betty Ong) she says they were all in the coach, and she was calling from a jump seat. I have no idea of those terms because English is not even my language. Can anybody help me to understand what the coach and jump seats are?. And why didn't the hijackers see her calling?, if pictures are on here would be great. Thank you all very much friends.--190.50.124.223 (talk) 06:57, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Coach is a mainly North American term for Economy class, a Jump seat is the type of folding seat that air stewards use or an extra seat in the cockpit. I haven't seen the episode you're talking about but economy is generally towards the rear of an aeroplane, it's possible she was calling from another part of the plane from them. Nanonic (talk) 07:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh and apparently this is related to the September 11 attacks in the USA and not a TV show, eek, sorry for missing that. Nanonic (talk) 07:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

A seating plan for the relevant aircraft can be seen here; it's the top one. (Different airlines may have somewhat different seating arrangements, but that almost certainly doesn't affect the positioning of the jump seats, which as our article says are used by the cabin crew whenever they need to be belted down, as during takeoff and landing.) The blue area at the rear of the plane would be the "coach" cabin, and the jump seats would be located at the rear of that, behind the rest rooms and thus out of view of someone in the passenger part of that cabin. Deor (talk) 11:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Phyllis Simons

hello my name is bernie i am doing some research for a friend about Phyllis Simons who was murdered and buried by her lover in the victoria tunnel wellington new zealand i have tried many websites and the dominion post and new zealand herald whic are local newspapers and found nothing the murder acured in the 1930s as that was when the tunnel was dug through and wasnt open till 1931

this is all i could get

A well-known local story revolves around a murder that occurred during the construction of the Mount Victoria Tunnel. A young woman named Phylis Simons was murdered by her lover, who buried her alive in the fill from the tunnel. It is suspected that the girl was pregnant to her lover and the story was later covered in the Wellington newspapers. Upon learning of the murder, police ordered workers to excavate the tunnel's fill in order to find the victim's body.

this is the web address http://wikimapia.org/13966509/Mount-Victoria-Tunnel

would much apreciate your help my email is <email removed> look forward to your reply —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.170.106 (talk) 11:16, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I've deleted your email address to try to stop it being picked up by spammers. Replies to questions to the Reference Desk are posted here, not sent to email addresses. --Phil Holmes (talk) 11:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

That Wikimapia text comes from our article Mount Victoria Tunnel. If you look in that article's history you may be able to find who added that paragraph and then contact the user for details.--Cam (talk) 14:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

candidates for hottest picture on the internet?

I know this is kind of subjective, but what are the best candidates or pics that have won contests (albeit obviously not net-wide) for the hottest photo on the Internet. Yes, I mean like sexy hott, and I'm being serious. If you don't know of any such contest or ranking or any photo with any claim to being the hottest photo on the Internet, just don't respond. Thanks for any serious responses. 84.153.228.114 (talk) 11:44, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

We will both be sharply rebuked for participating in a categorical orgy of subjectivity and opinion, but I will say that Shannen Doherty was maybe the slinkiest little kitty to ever crawl in front of a camera back in the late 90s, when sexy still meant something. . Of course tastes vary! Vranak (talk) 12:48, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

There are plenty of "rate this photo" sites out there on the web, and you could see which photos have high rankings on those sites. Since the matter is entirely subjective (not to mention that you haven't specified your personal inclinations), it's difficult to see how any very meaningful answer could be supplied here. (For example, the photo linked by Vranak shows someone who appears to be kneeling in a pool of diluted blood, which I do not find to be sexy...). -- AnonMoos (talk) 14:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

This picture should qualify... --Jayron32 16:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Joan of Arc. But too early for photos. 92.24.56.246 (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Hot indeed! But a little Jennifer Love Hewitt, or Jennifer Tilly would have improved it! 220.101.28.25 (talk) 18:46, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

It's a little known fact that Joan was given the chance to be decapitated instead, but she opted for immolation, saying, "A hot stake is better than a cold chop!" ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 00:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest a perusal of FHM Magazines' '100 sexist women' or similar, would be a good starting point --220.101.28.25 (talk) 18:46, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

"100 sexiest women" might get better search results... -- AnonMoos (talk) 22:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Best laugh I've had for a long time! ROFL! Though, our feminist editors might agree more with my typo than you! . But this is supposed to be serious, lets try to answer the OPs question! --220.101.28.25 (talk) 23:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

There is no objective answer, that's the point (and the original questioner hasn't even made it clear that he's interested in women rather than in men)... AnonMoos (talk) 23:51, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Or even that the OP is a he at all. Buddy431 (talk) 00:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Audrey Hepburn (Y) Rimush (talk) 20:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Catherine of Aragon. Hawt. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:29, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Hot stuff! --Mr.98 (talk) 22:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Getting back on track, hopefully, as AnonMoos says it's extremely subjective. 'Sexy Hott' is entirely in the eye of the beholder, with a lot of overlap between viewers. There must be literally billions of photos on the internet, and there is no central repository that ranks them. I do not believe that there is any photo with the "claim to being the hottest photo on the Internet" (My personal opinion does not reflect the official position of Misplaced Pages, the Misplaced Pages Foundation or any associated entities)--220.101.28.25 (talk) 00:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe this drawing depicts the aftermath of what would be one of the hottest photos on the internet. Unfortunately taking such a photo is not possible, and would be rather boring anyway. Whether you find this sort of hot, sexy hot, I'm not particularly sure as others have mentioned you didn't really specify what you find sexy Nil Einne (talk) 05:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Well if you're a Physicist, I suppose that may get you flustered, each to their own! (How hot would that event depicted have been?) Though I wonder if this question should have been accepted at all, we're not supposed to give opinion here, I gather. 220.101.28.25 (talk) 08:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The OP did ask for references, i.e. of contests or rankings, not just our opinion. Vimescarrot (talk) 11:48, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Clearly some female balance is needed here, so the hottest pictures currently available on the 'net are all those depicting Christian Bale, Edward Norton, James McAvoy, Hugh Jackman, Colin Firth, and Kate Winslet (she transcends sexual orientation, okay?). No charge for such indispensable information, but you can thank me later. As has been mentioned, there are lots of "rate me" sites out there, but they rely on submissions and not just internet-wide availability. My googling was quite fruitless. Maybe you've spotted a gap in the market. Maedin\ 12:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Not really a "gap", since unauthorized linking of an image on one site from another site is a shady and often unethical practice which the victims can actually take simple measures to counteract -- see Inline linking and further links there... AnonMoos (talk) 13:37, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, here's a list of 100 individuals that may fit this definition . And another . This poor chap is so hot, he had to take his shirt off. Most inconvenient. 86.178.230.208 (talk) 13:31, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

A picture that is entirely black would absorb rather more of the light and heat travelling through the room, and so gradually heat up, particularly if you aimed a lamp right at it. 148.197.114.158 (talk) 17:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Correlation between inflation and social mobility

In the UK social mobility is said to be less now than it was in the 1970s. We had lots of inflation in the 70s, very little now. Is there any correlation between the two? 92.29.130.174 (talk) 13:03, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I can't think of an obvious link (presumably this would rely on inflation having a disproportionate effect on some sections of society). Your other problem is, social mobility is rather subjective, whereas inflation is completely objective. Comparing the two can be difficult. - Jarry1250  13:43, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

You could measure social or economic mobility by changes in social class, income, wealth. 92.29.81.16 (talk) 11:36, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Policies which favor creditors can have an effect of discouraging social mobility, while policies which favor debtors can have an effect of encouraging social mobility. A moderate degree of inflation (not significant enough to disrupt the economy) can favor debtors, and so could theoretically favor social mobility (though to what degree this would actually happen in real life is another question). AnonMoos (talk) 14:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

A moderate degree of unexpected inflation favours debtors. If the inflation is expected then it will accounted for in interest rates. That means you can't intentionally use inflation to increase social mobility. --Tango (talk) 23:23, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Are there any more statistics for different time periods for social mobility please? Currently I've only got vague information about two points. 92.24.56.246 (talk) 23:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Capital and Labour

Could you say something about this caricature??? --Michael Reschke 21:08, 23. Jan. 2010 (CET) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Reschke (talk • contribs) 20:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Is this a homework assignment? Reference Desk doesn't answer homework assignments unless you've put in good faith effort first? However, what is there to say? Clearly the cartoon shows the stark contrast between the wealthy and privileged members of Western/European and/or United States society of the 19th century vs. the life of the poor and working classes. And some racial inequity as well. --71.111.194.50 (talk) 21:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

The key may be identifying the women with the anchor, accompanied by the cherub, and what she symbolizes. The rich family's wealth is clearly founded on the suffering of the poor, but there is also the fact that the overseer's pile of gold is blocking the door, preventing the anchor woman coming in. Could she be justice, or compassion, or the government? I can't read the letters on the door. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 21:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Illustration by John Leech (caricaturist), Capital and Labour, Punch Magazine, May, 1843 - at least according to the internet. He has shown the locks on the door in detail (Chubb and Brama), so the woman is locked out. The woman may be Brittania. Perhaps it symbolises the squalid exploitation of the workers being kept hidden from government or public scrutiny. I think aristocrats quite often obtained their great wealth from owning mines, living in luxury and choosing to ignore the misery of the workers they exploited. Some further internet searching says that the phrase "working class" was first used in 1817, suggesting a growing awareness of the poor at that time. Perhaps attitudes were changing I speculate - in the past social class may have been seen fatalisticly as the work of God, "the rich man at his gate" as the hymn said, but with the increasing science of the time less religious and more compassionate attitudes may have started to appear. 92.24.56.246 (talk) 22:28, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Looks rather like the hand of George Cruikshank; "the modern Hogarth". Alansplodge (talk) 22:29, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Er, I thought Shallabala was R. J. Hamerton? - Jarry1250  22:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Put "'punch and labour' 1843 punch" into Google Books and you can find lots of scholarly analysis of the piece. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

"Love Opens the Door to Hope?" --Wetman (talk) 00:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

According to this page, an anchor is a symbol of "hope"; so it makes sense. Alansplodge (talk) 09:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

In case y'all were doing a cartoon analysis of this cartoon for a certain test, look no further. The Lady represents either Dame Fortune or Lady Luck, who, you guessed it, represents luck, and controls power in human affairs. The Cherub (winged child) is an angel who's main 'gift' is knowledge. The anchor is a symbol of hope. These objects are locked away, representing the lack of knowledge and hope in the mine shaft. Next to this is a door dividing between where the hope and knowledge is and the mine shaft. On the other side, sitting against the wall is the 'overseer', sitting on a pile of bags labeled 'gold'. He also holds keys. This also signifies the fact that he does not want knowledge or hope let into the mine shaft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.165.84.155 (talk) 08:22, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Is 'A man's a man for all that' mostly liberal or socialist?

The WP article tells you that it could be interpreted as both, but what is it most? To me it feels more like liberal, because the essence of "we're poor, but we're honest". A socialist probably would have said, "we are poor and we deserve better". Also the song speaks in favour or "free thinking", which not all socialists agree with. What's your opinions? Yrge (talk) 23:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

We can't tell you our opinions (that's not what the reference desk is for); you have to make up your own mind. As you say, and as the Robert Burns article notes, his work (including "Is There for Honest Poverty") is regarded (by modern folk) as both (or either) liberal or socialist. But I fear they (and perhaps your teacher) are too keen to project the politics of today onto the romantic works of a somewhat dissolute taxman who died more than two centuries ago. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 00:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Burns himself, of course, would have been bewildered by the question. Moonraker2 (talk) 00:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

As a point of interest, Colin Fox, leader of the Scottish Socialist Party, sang it when being sworn in as an MSP in 2003, as a protest against having to swear the oath of alleigance to the Queen. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3006175.stm Dalliance (talk) 20:16, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

It's kind of a paraphrase of "When Adam delved and Eve span / Who was then the Gentleman", a couplet which had wide circulation across several countries of Europe centuries before anyone had heard of liberalism or socialism... AnonMoos (talk) 00:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

By the way, it might be nice to have a central Misplaced Pages article on "When Adam delved and Eve span" (currently information on this historically-significant mini-poem seems to be scattered in fragmentary form across a number of different articles). In case the verbs are too archaic to easily grasp the meaning, it refers to Adam digging in the fields for agriculture and Eve spinning material into thread (to be later woven into cloth). AnonMoos (talk) 00:16, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Burns was quite a radical and a supporter of the French revolution. Liberalism and socialism didn't exist as concepts and tended to blend into general "radicalism" in practice. Both a (proto-)liberal and a (proto-)socialist at Burns' time naturally wanted a revolution and total change of the status quo towards greater justice; both felt that the masses were oppressed and deserved better, and certainly neither would content himself with a resignated "we're poor but honest", as the OP suggests (hardly anything "liberal" about such a statement either, even from a modern point of view). As for Burns, he doesn't stop at "we're poor but honest", and he clearly expresses hope for some kind of egalitarian revolution to improve the situation of those who "deserve better" in the last stanza: "For a' that, an' a' that, It's coming yet for a' that, That Man to Man, the world o'er, Shall brothers be for a' that". Now, the rich elite he condemns in the song is mostly composed of aristocrats and not of capitalists, because aristocrats were the most obvious bosses at the time; thus, one could say that the song is more liberal than socialist. But since aristocratic power is now history and the most obvious bosses today are the capitalists, modern socialism shares more of the song's egalitarian sentiments than modern liberalism does. --91.148.159.4 (talk) 19:50, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

January 24

Julius Caesar and The Netherlands

I've heard that Julius Caesar considered conquering all The Netherlands, but he was told that the (norther?) inhabitants "ate eggs and lived in trees," so he decided to skip them. Is there any source for this story? --143.44.75.37 (talk) 06:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't know about his considerations for conquest, but he mentions egg-eaters in that region in his Gallic Wars (IV, 10):

"The Rhine, moreover, rises in the country of the Lepontii, who dwell in the Alps, and in a long course flows rapidly through the territories of the Nantuates, the Helvetians, the Sequanians, the Mediomatrici, the Triboci, and the Treverans; where it approaches the Ocean it divides up into several branches, forming many large islands. Of these (islands) a considerable portion are inhabited by wild and savage tribes, some of whom are believed to live on fish and birds' eggs. It (the Rhine) flows into the Ocean through many mouths."--Cam (talk) 06:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

It is important to note here that Caesar did not abandon conquering the area on account of the inhabitants eating eggs, nor that the Romans did not eat eggs themselves (they did). The point being in stressing that they lived on fish and eggs was that they had no agriculture and did not even hunt wild animals, and was thus in the eyes of the Romans, even more uncivilized than the average Germanic tribes who did both farm and hunt. --Saddhiyama (talk) 12:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Dalmuir (Gaelic: Dail Mhoire) : Farms: Dalmuir and Loretto in Limpopo, South Africa.

The two farms are located near Alldays in the province of Limpopo,South Africa. I found a town in Scotland with the name Dalmuir and a school with the name "Our Lady of Loretto Catholic Primary School" Question:

1. Are there a connection between the farm's name and the town Dalmuir in Scotland?
2. Who was the "The Lady of Loretto"?
3. What is the meaning of the word Dalmuir(Dail Mhoire)?

Thank you for the much appreciated information.

DRIES VERSTER. LIMPOPO. SOUTH AFRICA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.145.30.55 (talk) 10:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

"dail" means meadow or field (ref). "Mhoire" is the Scottish Gaelic form of the given name Moira, or Mary. Mary in this case is the Virgin Mary, so literally it means "The virgin Mary's field". Loreto, or Loretto, is the house in which the Virgin Mary was said to have been born (ref). It's often the case that places in countries that were former colonies of European countries were named after places in the old country (Houston, Banff, Perth, Birmingham, etc.); it's likely that the namers of these farms hailed from sunny Dalmuir, but I think you'd need to do some checking with local historical sources to know for sure. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 11:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Incidentally this certainly doesn't mean that anyone thinks that the Virgin Mary is from Clydebank, but rather that the site of the town was formerly the location of a religious establishment dedicated to the Virgin (perhaps the Sisters of Loreto or a similarly named order of nuns). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 11:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Paisley Abbey (which is about 4 miles south of Dalmuir) was dedicated (in part) to Mary; it may simply be that Dalmuir stands on fields that were once owned by the Abbey. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 12:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Muir is also Scottish moor: "Dalemoor".--Wetman (talk) 12:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The trouble is that this is a false friend. When Celtic, Brythonic, Old English, and Norse placenames got turned into their modern versions, they often got smushed around so they sounded right. So one can't simply take the parts of a modern placename, reverse translate them, and then get a definite answer what that placename means. The historical origin of the name is what counts. An example is that prefix "Dal": in many Scottish context it means "meadow", as in Dalmuir. But in many English (and some Scottish) contexts it isn't directly from the Celtic or Brythonic, but from the Old English "dæl", which means valley. That's the case for Dalton, Lancashire (valley-town) and Dalwood in Devon (valley-wood). As "dæl" is likely a descendent of "dail", the meaning of the two gets blurred sometimes, and Dalry, North Ayrshire is sometimes given either (or both). Things get worse, though: you'd think Dalston, Cumbria would mean "meadow town" or at least "valley town", but it actually means "Farmstead of a man named Dall", and Dalston in London (heck, it's the same exact word) means "Farmstead of a man named Deorlaf". Worse still, Dalkey in Ireland doesn't mean "meadow island" or "valley island", but means "thorn island", from the irish "deilg" meaning "thorn" (or is that Old Scandinavian "dalkr", which also means "thorn"). So there's no substitute for actually looking that specific placename up. Mills' Oxford Dictionary of British Placenames is a start. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 14:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Comic strip

Hello. Do you know the author of this image (unreadable signature)? Sorry if it isn't the good place for the post. Thanks. Michael Laurent (talk) 11:49, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

It does not look professional. My guess would be that it was done by some random teen. --Saddhiyama (talk) 12:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The thorn bracelet seems to be a nod to Linsner's "Dawn", but I suspect that it's not by Linsner... AnonMoos (talk) 14:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, this page claims it's Linsner but the signature looks different from the others.--Cam (talk) 15:37, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's Joe Linsner: AFAIK his babes are all redheads. Michael Laurent (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The user has since posed this same question on the Misc page. So far, the Humanities page is leading the race to find the answer. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I was not sure of what was the good place to post (and I wrote it). Win the race please! ;) Michael Laurent (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

This could also have gone under "Entertainment". If in doubt, post to Misc and someone might suggest a spot to move it to - although many of the same users watch several of the ref desk pages. The risk in posting it twice, other than redundancy, is that you might get two absolutely certain and contradictory answers. :) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I thought "Entertainment" was only for music and video. ML —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Laurent (talk) 16:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeh, probably so. Looking at the illustration on that website ... (1) the website claims it's this guy Linsner; and (2) my own eyesight is not that good - where are you seeing a signature? In the circled item on your original posting? All I see there is a copyright symbol and a year. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 16:22, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The circled part on the original post is not a signature. It's the copyright symbol ("c" in a circle) with a "19" under it and a "97" under that. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 16:29, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Of course, there is a (c) symbol but the signature of Linsner ("LINSNER") is missing. I think that the glyph beside the (c) is an abreviated signature or personal mark of the artist. Michael Laurent (talk) 18:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

My first thought was "Alas poor goathead! I knew him, impractically-clad Horatio." DJ Clayworth (talk) 00:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The author is Kevin J. Taylor (find by a member of a french comix forum). Thanks for your tries. Michael Laurent (talk) 19:05, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Edward Barber, Barbour, Barbor, British sailor 1703

On tv last night was mentioned a British sailor who served for over forty years at sea, and kept an illustrated diary of his life. The date 1703 is associated with him - I forget in what way. I have not be able to find anything about him on the internet despite trying for a long time. Can anyone find any details about him or his diary please? 92.29.81.16 (talk) 13:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

You say you saw it on TV, any clue as to which TV show you were watching? Nanonic (talk) 14:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Empire Of The Seas: How The Navy Forged The Modern World. Episode 2, The Golden Ocean. BBC 2, UK. 92.29.81.16 (talk) 15:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The BBC microsite is devoid of information on him, which is pretty poor really, comparing it to Channel 4 history microsites such as Time Team I wonder if you contacted the National Maritime Museum or the Royal Naval Museum they could help you? --TammyMoet (talk) 15:43, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

It was Edward Barlow, born 1642 in Prestwich. Not much about him on the web, it seems. His journal, covering the years 1659 to 1703, was published in a 1934 edition edited by Basil Lubbock. I found a one-paragraph bio on him here (Google Books link, may not be viewable everywhere).--Cam (talk) 19:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

musicians and drugs

why do musicians take so many drugs? --Belchman (talk) 15:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

That statement includes a presumption of truth without presenting any evidence in support. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Can you please rephrase the question? Bus stop (talk) 15:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

If you guys don't know the answer and think that musicians have the same addiction problems as, for example, engineers, I don't know what you are doing here. --Belchman (talk) 15:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I think that musicians have the same addiction problems as engineers. Can you provide any indication that my presumption is incorrect? Bus stop (talk) 15:54, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I do believe that engineers know that a true high does not involve a rocket Blood Red Sandman 22:43, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Then, you, sir, are an idiot. --Belchman (talk) 21:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Retract that comment or you could get blocked for personal attack. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 21:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I've reported the OP's behavior at WP:ANI. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 21:33, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I honestly wonder what you're doing here, User:Baseball Bugs. You don't answer questions, you just chit-chat with regulars and are arrogant to question askers. The Internet's huge, there are better places to do both things than Misplaced Pages's RD, which is a serious place. --Belchman (talk) 22:23, 24 January 2010 (UTC)O

The OP was initially indef'd, soon reduced to a 5-day block. I don't care what he calls me, but he has yet to explain his comments directed at Bus Stop. Shooting at multiple targets is the primary reason I reported him. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 22:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

You have over-reacted. The OP has a point, and he was provoked. Turn the other cheek. 92.29.74.148 (talk) 00:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

He was not "provoked". He's not a puppet on a string. He chose to say what he said. You, on the other hand, are a one-shot drive-by. Amazing how you came straight to this page with your one and only edit, knowing all about this situation, or so you think. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 00:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

There have actually been a few studies on the question how much drug use actually happens amongst musicians, and what the collective assumption of drug use amongst musicians does to musicians. I think it's undeniable that there's a cultural stereotype of drug use amongst musicians who do any kind of popular (e.g. not classical) music. This abstract discusses some of the results found—that these perceptions are linked to age and gender, no surprise—and this one further argues that type of music features heavily into these perceptions. As for how many musicians actually use drugs, and why, is not entirely clear, as far as I can tell. Speculation relates to the touring lifestyle, the access to easy money in some cases, and the age-old perception that being a musician is about wine, women, and song, and more modernly, sex, drugs and rock and roll. --Mr.98 (talk) 15:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Referencing the OP's followup question... What would really be needed is a study to compare the relative use of any kind of substances (including alcohol and legally-used prescription drugs) between the entertainment world and the population as a whole. I have a hunch the difference is not as significant as pop culture would have us believe. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The free-spirited ethos of a rocker and the free-wheeling ways of a druggie are largely overlapping. That, and rockers can afford drugs. That said, I don't think this stereotype has been at all accurate since the mid-80s. And to the above posters, please be nice to Bugs, whatever you think he is, he is certainly a regular and a good one at that. Vranak (talk) 00:29, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

While I'm in favour of being nice to each other, 'regular' status should have no part in this. It is irrelevant. 86.179.150.105 (talk) 18:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

You've got two edits to your name. How did you find this page? Regardless, the OP (who is a "regular", having been online since August) posed a question that assumed certain facts, and was challenged as to the veracity of those assumptions. Why do you have a problem with that? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 01:03, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

As I said, I have no problem with addressing the assumptions in questions, nor with reminding People to be nice to each other. I do have a problem with judging someone's behaviour differently, or letting them off the hook, because they are a regular. It's a dangerous game to play; I'm actually more of a regular than you are. As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, a great many people have rotating IPs and, without them doing anything, are issued a new address after a while. Nobody else finds this hard to understand. One of the reasons I don't log in is to bypass the politics and have my edits judged entirely on their own basis,like in the early days. 86.179.150.105 (talk) 02:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Retract your unfounded accusations of sock puppetry, please. --Belchman (talk) 04:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I guess that is true. Vranak (talk) 19:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Sigh. The question got off to a bad start here. I assume the OP wants to know why "so many musicians" allegedly take drugs and not a count of the drugs dosed. See the article Psychedelic music. Starting in the 60s there have been experimental music styles inspired by mind altering drugs and that development continues today. See the latter article for a long list of bands identified as neo-psychedelic. All the musicians in all these bands cannot be drug users but some may be, and some of them may believe drugs help them create their music. However musicians are just as likely to begin taking drugs for reasons unrelated to music such as Peer pressure, drug trafficking or curiosity. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 19:48, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The association between musicians and mind-altering substances of various sorts way predates the sixties. Marijuana and heroin were in common use in the jazz and blues communities pretty much from the start, as far as I can tell; Louis Armstrong recorded Muggles in 1928, and he certainly did not invent it. --jpgordon 01:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

What is this?

How does it work? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.39.49 (talk) 15:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

It's either a joke or an abusive violation of Misplaced Pages's BLP policy. I've removed it; do not restore it. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 15:11, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Also the link in question was a form of Referrer spam. Nanonic (talk) 16:21, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Should the IP be blocked for that outrage? Will linking to that site infect one's PC? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 16:37, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

I am interested in this area where someone in power (eg office boss, university teacher, petty politician, traffic cop) offers someone an unofficial usually secret reward in return for favours or personal loyalty (or vice versa). Where can I read more about the fundamentals of this general relationsip from a modern sociological or social-psychology point of view? I have already looked at Neopatrimonialism, Patrimonialism, Patron-client relationship, Clientela, Cronyism, Nepotism, Spoils system, Paternalism, Graft. It is a pity that Misplaced Pages does not have an article that links all these similar things together, and that links in these and other articles link to inappropriate things - it is as if they were trying to link to a general article that does not exist. 92.29.81.16 (talk) 15:15, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Another term to add to the list is Wasta. AnonMoos (talk) 16:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The article mentions you scatch my back, I'll scratch your as being Stage Two in Kohlberg's stages of moral development. But looking at it, it could I think equally well be Stage Three or Stage Four if your culture has the above as part of its normal culture. 89.242.94.72 (talk) 23:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Unidentified batallion

Hey all. Sorry to bother you with another question so soon after the last one, but I'm trying to find out the identity of the battalion pictured. The photograph was taken at Colchester in about 1898, but that's all I know. In fact, without doing a quick head count and comparing against the article British Army, I wouldn't even know it was a battalion, and I don't even know if it's possible to find out which. I'm hoping there might be a clue as to their identity in the picture somewhere that I'm missing. According to the 1893 war list, the 1st Bn. Derby R., the 2nd Bn. Northampton R. and the 1st Bn. Suffolk R. were the only foot units stationed in Colchester, but I have no idea how much they moved around back then. Any help appreciated, - Jarry1250  16:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Have you tried the Military History WikiProject? DuncanHill (talk) 16:37, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Looking at the image in high resolution, it looks rather as though the "other ranks" are wearing Glengarry bonnets, which would suggest a Scottish regiment. English and Welsh line regiments would be wearing the Home Service Helmet (a bit like a policeman's) at this time (1881-1902). Alansplodge (talk) 17:05, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I was going to ask them if I failed here. And yes, I'll look into that, thanks. - Jarry1250  18:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Income inequality

Is there any measure of income inequality that takes into account redistriubtionist policies and welfare benefits? --Gary123 (talk) 18:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Elaborate, please? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 21:16, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Gini coefficient comes to mind, but I'm not sure whether you're looking for that or not. --Belchman (talk) 21:27, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I think what he's looking for is a sort-of "Gini coefficient if you subtract all welfare given to poor people". I seriously doubt there is one (but look at the Income inequality metrics for details on the topic), because the whole point of these metrics is to measure actual income disparities, and welfare benefits factor into that. Such a metric simply wouldn't be measuring reality. I suspect the motive is that the questioner wants a metric that puts the US on a more even keel with Europe and Canada, but the reason the US does worse on these lists are not because of flawed metrics; it's because the US has more income inequality. You can debate all day whether redistributionist policies are good or bad, but if you are going to measure their effects, you have to base it on reality. Belisarius (talk) 22:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm looking for a measure that takes into account the kind of problems with measuring state benefits pointed out here in the gini article: "Comparing income distributions among countries may be difficult because benefits systems may differ. For example, some countries give benefits in the form of money while others give food stamps, which might not be counted by some economists and researchers as income in the Lorenz curve and therefore not taken into account in the Gini coefficient. The USA counts income before benefits, while France counts it after benefits, making the USA appear slightly more unequal vis-a-vis France than it admittedly is. In another example, USSR appeared to have relatively high income inequality: by some estimates, in the late 70's, Gini coefficient of its urban population was as high as 0.38, which is higher than many Western countries today. This apparent inequality ignored the fact that many benefits received by Soviet citizens were nonmonetary and were afforded regardless of income: these benefits included, among others, free child care for children as young as 2 months, free elementary, secondary and higher education, free cradle-to-grave medical care, free or heavily subsidized housing. In this example, an accurate comparison between the 1970s USSR and Western countries would require one to assign monetary values to such benefits (a difficult task in the absence of free markets). Similar problems arise whenever a comparison between pure free-market economies and partially socialist economies is attempted. Benefits may take various and unexpected forms: for example, major oil producers such as Venezuela and Iran provide indirect benefits to its citizens by subsidizing the retail price of gasoline." --Gary123 (talk) 23:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

You need to find a list of Geni coefficients that are all calculated by the same economist, rather than just a collation of values calculated by different people. --Tango (talk) 00:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if the OECD's stats are normalised in the way that Tango is talking about; but they may be worth a look at. Their main statistics site is here: . You may be better off looking for one of the OECD's "issue" based statistical releases (I forget the name they give them) - they'd most likely have a better set of data, however it might be a few years old. Good luck! --Roydisco (talk) 15:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Priamary and Secondary qualities

Regarding John Lockes primary and secondary qualities, as bescribed in book 2 of his work 'an essay concerning human understanding summary'. If I have understood correctly Locke defines secondary qualities as ones which do not belong to an object, but are invoked in a person studying the object, Locke references things like colour, smell and pain, as secondary qualities; and goes on to say that they cannot be understood seperately from the sense used to interpret them.

Lockes view was heavily influenced by his belief in Boyle's corpuscular theory that everything was made up of corpuscles which had the properties of shade, mass and motion, and that all other qualities of an object were derived from the complex motions of the corpuscles.

Given today's understanding of modern science, what senses could be said to be of Locke's secondary senses, seeing as we now know that colour is emission spectra, and is a distinct property of an object, scent is density of certain particles that excite our noses, and that our view of the nervous system has distinctly moved out interpretation of pain.

So in short, and to recap for those wondering what the question is about:

In the context of modern science, what senses could be said to be of Locke's secondary senses?

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by the user currently known as 129.67.39.49 (talk) 18:52, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Could you give some examples of the primary qualities please? 89.242.40.192 (talk) 13:08, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Anything, mass, colour, number, weight, brightness, smell, heat, temperature, are all understood in terms of their governing dynamics and not solely as an artefact of our interactions with objects. Does anyone have a helpful answer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.118.228 (talk) 20:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

You've said that colour and smell are both primary and secondary qualities. Apart from that, perhaps qualities which are familiar in physics such as mass, number, weight, heat and temperature are primary qualities and the rest are secondary qualities. 89.243.82.225 (talk) 22:03, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

You have totally missed the point, obviously to locke, some things were unseperable from his senses, however today almost everything is understood as an effect independent from our senses. We do not need to look at something to know its colour, it is a property of the objects emission spectra, and so on. So I am asking, are their any physical things which we can sense that are not quantifiably explainable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.116.165 (talk) 04:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

No. 92.24.54.79 (talk) 22:44, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure, I mean hunger is a tenuous hope. There is no object with the property of hunger. We know how it is caused, but we cannot quantify it. But I was looking for more real world examples...

Well, if you already know the answers....78.149.231.228 (talk) 01:26, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

The Oxford Dictionary Of Philosophy has an article "primary/secondary qualities" which reinforces 89.243s suggestion above. The article says that Berkeley criticised the dichotomy. You may be able to find this or other dictionaries or encyclopaedias of philosophy online, eg Google Books, or in a library. Try looking it up in those. And from five minutes spent reading online about it, the scientific method was being slowly developed around that time, and it looks like Locke's dicotomy was dropped from it. At least its not mentioned in History of scientific method. 89.242.92.249 (talk) 12:38, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Why did the movement to create Grammar Shools (in North America = 'Public Schools') arise?

Up until the 16th - 17th century in Europe education was reserved for the wealthy and the church. All of a sudden grammer schools for the children of commoners sprang up across Europe and soon became mandatory for all children to attend. It was a huge cultural change that seems to have had a life of its own. There really is no recorded movement or documentation that I can find that points to the start of this social phenomenon. There is lots of documentation about debates surrounding these schools, their curriculum, and style of teaching and who should control them but all those debates simply take the fact that grammer schools exist as a given.

The existence of schools for the children of the ordinary population, might have started a few centuries earlier in the Middle East and Asia but even they seem to have sprung up spontaneously at a certain point in a society's development. In North America, as soon as the original settlers had chopped dosee Vol. XIV, Cjapwn enough trees to start a framing community, almost without question the inhabitants cleared enough land to build a school house.

This may be as much a sociological question as a historical question. I am not looking for a long historical tritest but I would appreciate anyone who can point me to a competent history of schooling. So, ...

How and why did Grammar Schools come about? --Bill Case (talk) 19:16, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

You could do worse than to start with the article on Horace Mann and see where it takes you. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 19:44, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

(EC) According to History of education in England Before 1870, education was largely a private affair, with wealthy parents sending their children to fee-paying schools, and others using whatever local teaching was made available. That article will useful, but more so Grammar school will be, which notes that before Victorian times Grammar Schools were not schools for general education, but just the rote learning of classical languages; and were genrally set up by the wealthy. I should imagine this was just part of the general social responsibility of the wealthier classes, and was not really anything of a sudden phenomeneon (the oldest Grammar school in the UK dates back to c700). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.39.49 (talk) 19:48, 24 January 2010

In the 19th century, government responsibility for education in England was greatly hindered for decades by religious disputes, with Church of England adherents insisting that nationally-established schools would naturally teach the national religion, while Protestant "dissenters" vehemently objected to being taxed in order to promulgate somebody else's religion, or have their children be subjected to proselytism. That's why several states of the U.S. more or less pulled ahead of England (though since everything in the U.S. was done on an individual state level, many states — especially in the south — lagged far behind). AnonMoos (talk) 08:24, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The Cambridge History of English and American Literature - here - provides what seems to be a comprehensive overview - see Vol XIV, Chapter XIV - and bibliography. From a quick perusal, the Taunton Commission of 1864-67 seems to be particularly relevant (for the UK). Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the above suggestions. I have checked all the references provided. However, those references and others that I traced from them underline the difficulty. Horace Mann and Henry Bernard are both reformers of a system of grade (grammar, public) schools already in existence. "History of education in England" makes reference to Edward VI who in 1563 reformed schools for commoners and apprentices. One presumes that some sort of educational system already existed to reform.

On the other hand, when reading about the early medieval or dark ages, there is no mention of education for the young children of commoners or serfs. By the late 1500s the literature does talk about the local early schooling of various historical figures. For example, Shakespeare attended a school (albeit paid for by his step father) in Stratford-upon-Avon.

In Canada as well as the U.S. there are extensive histories of various Universities, but no record of any movement to set up local schools for children. In the historical documents of the early settlement period of both countries, there is a record of community debates about hiring teachers, curriculum etc. From my reading (I am a Canadian history buff) it seems that as soon as enough land was cleared to start a community or village, the top priority was to chop down a few more trees to build a church and a school house. In other words, primary schooling was a well established part of the culture. Yet when I look into European history for when and where this educational movement started; it's existence is just taken for granted.

If these schools were started by the church, for example, how, why and when did the church(es) decide to move out from cloistered education for the wealthy, into the countryside in order to educate commoner children? It seems a mystery to me that no reputable historian has analyzed and recorded the start of this most significant cultural movement -- universal education.

Not sure if this helps you much, but I've read that Scotland had universal (or near universal) education long before England. This article seems to confirm that. TastyCakes (talk) 20:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes this article, History of education in Scotland, is exactly the kind of thing I am looking for. Of course it only mentions Scotland and the documentation is brief, but it could be a start to finding out how universal education began in England, Europe and China as well. If the church is so intimately involved, which I am pretty sure is the case, it would be interesting to read their thinking, implementation and financing. --Bill Case (talk) 02:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

One point I've seen mentioned is the Protestant emphasis on reading the Bible. This is said to have motivated Protestant states & churches to provide elementary education for as many as possible. Peter jackson (talk) 11:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Double entry bookkeeping described in scientific terms

I'm used to the idea of a source, channel, and reciever (or destination you could call it) in communication. Apart from all the obfusticating jargon, is DEB simply about having batches of money travelling from one pot (source) down a pipe (channel) to another pot (reciever). That each time some money passes through a pipe, that is a transaction. That each pot is an account. Because you've always got two pots involved (source and reciever), you are doing double-entry bookkeeping. Pots can be both the source and the destination of money. Money going into a pot is a credit. Money going out of a pot is a debit. Naturally, the debits and credits must match. Is this analogy correct please? Have I left anything out? Thanks 89.242.94.72 (talk) 22:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not entirely familiar with your preferred jargon of "source' and "receiver", but if I'm reading this correctly, then no, double entry bookkeeping is not about visualising money as flowing from one pot to another.

Think of it as conservation of mass or conservation of energy - or in this case, conservation of (money) value. For every action done to the money value in the accounts, there will be an equal and opposite reaction - one a credit entry, the other a debit entry.

You push on a rock, the rock pushes back at you. You pay the supplier (credit cash, i.e. decrease cash), the supplier gives you some machinery (debit PPE assets, i.e. increase assets). Or, in another example, the customer gives you some money (debit cash, i.e. increase cash), credit inventory (i.e. decrease inventory) and also credit revenue (i.e. increase revenue).

That is to say, for every movement of value, there must be one account that is "debited" and another that is "credited", so that the overall amount of "value" in your accounts remain the same within an accounting period. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure you havnt got debit and credit mixed up please? When I credit my bank account, the amount of money in it goes up, not down. A direct debit removes money from my bank account and the amount in it goes down. You also say "credit inventory (i.e. decrease inventory)...credit revenue (i.e. increase revenue)" - contradicting yourself. How do you explain "the customer gives you some money...., credit inventory...and also credit revenue". That would be triple entry bookkeeping. And if the amount of value remains the same, then how does a business ever make a profit or a loss? 89.242.94.72 (talk) 23:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

(ec) Your deposit accountis a Liability owed by the bank to you. For the bank, it's on the right hand or credit side of the T-accounts in double entry book-keeping, hence why it's in "credit" when positive and "debit" when negative in the bank's accounts. On your own accounts, if you were to practice double entry book-keeping, the credit/debit will be reversed if you treat your bank deposit as an asset.

The bank's own cash account is an Asset, and on the left or debit side of the T-accounts in double entry book-keeping, hence why it's in "debit" when positive and "credit" when negative in the bank's accounts.

A direct debt "debits" (i.e. decreases) your account with your bank, i.e. decreases your bank's liabilities.

For the sale example, one side is "increase in cash", the equal and opposite force is "decrease in inventory and increase in profit". This is not "triple entry", because the sum of the amounts on one side is equal to the sum of the amounts on the other. If it helps, think of the payment (say $100) as in two oparts: one part for your costs (say $60 of inventory), and the other part for your profit (say $40 of profit).

It's like chemical potential energy in an explosion turning into sound, heat and kinetic energy. The sum on both sides balance. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The company makes a "profit or loss" even though the total "value" in the accounts remain the same during the period, because profit/loss is one of the accounts in the system. A business hopes that its profit/loss account will be positive at the end of the year, at which point it might distribute this away as a dividend, accounted for at the end of the period. In the new accounting period, you start with your opening balances and start running your accounts again. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

This section within the referenced article gives a simple example of what happens, bookkeepingwise, on a purchase. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 23:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

89.242.94.72, I think you misunderstand what is meant by the two different accounts in double-entry bookkeeping. The basic idea is that the business enterprise has two different kinds of accounts: asset accounts, representing property the business owns, and liability and capital accounts, representing claims against the business (liability accounts are for amounts owed, and the capital account is for the ownership stake). Every transaction, then, requires at least two entries in these accounts, a debit and a credit. A "debit" is an increase in assets or a decrease in liabilities or capital, and a "credit" is a decrease in assets or an increase in liabilities or capital. Debits and credits must always equal.

This is just the business's own bookkeeping. If it has counterparties that also use double-entry bookkeeping, then those counterparties will make their own accounting entries. For example, if Widget Mfg. Co. pays its electric bill, it credits its cash account (representing less cash) and debits its Power Co. liability account (representing less liability). Meanwhile, Power Co. debits its cash account (representing more cash) and credits its Widget Mfg. Co. account receivable asset account (representing a lower account receivable).

Although it's called "double-entry," some transactions can require more than two entries. Suppose that an auto dealership is carrying a used car at $10,000, the amount it paid for the car. It sells the car for $12,000 cash. The dealership debits its cash account by $12,000 (more cash), credits its inventory account by $10,000 (less inventory), and credits its income account by $2,000 (more income). At the end of the accounting period, the net amount of its income account will be debited and there will be a corresponding credit to its capital account.

As the last example shows, accounting entries do not always reflect the movement of assets. Sometimes they reflect internal events with no third party, such as period-end accounting adjustments and write-downs of impaired assets. John M Baker (talk) 04:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Are there any cartoon-style introductions to DEB please? The banks have a lot to answer for by confusing people with Direct Debits, when they ought to be called Direct Credits from the customer's point of view. 78.146.106.225 (talk) 14:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

January 25

Copyrights and linking to URLs

I vaguely remember hearing a story some time ago about a webmaster in Europe (can't remember which country) who was successfully sued by the owners of other European websites for copyright violation because he'd linked to their URLs. Am I remembering rightly, or have I mangled something in my memory? And if so, how is it that websites in this European country are able to link to any other websites without getting sued for the same reason? Nyttend (talk) 01:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

There are a number of relevant international cases on this—see Copyright aspects of hyperlinking and framing. Most cases that have been decided in favor of the site owner revolve around deep linking—e.g., skipping a site's pay wall or ads or whatever. But not all of them. Courts have successfully made a muddle of the issue by not really clarifying the technical differences relating to what is allowed and not allowed, and, to be fair, the technical differences are not necessarily very clear either (deep linking is not handled any differently than any other kind of linking in the HTTP protocol, for example). This is, to be sure, an evolving area of case law. --Mr.98 (talk) 02:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Suffice to say that the courts bungled that case. Unless I am mistaken, a company can easily mask all their premium content from the unpaying public with a login mechanism. Vranak (talk) 03:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but if you push for technical solutions, there will always be technical workarounds, and pretty soon you are in DRM territory. Which isn't an attractive option either. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps, but make the workarounds illegal. When linking to an image on a free website becomes cause for a successful lawsuit, we've clearly strayed into fascism. I think it similar to telling somebody what you read in a newspaper and being fined $1000 for revealing company secrets. Vranak (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Err, so you're arguing for a technical solution, rather than a legal one, but then if someone tries to circumvent the technical solution, you just make that illegal. Why not just outlaw it in the first place and skip the run-around, especially since technical solutions generally do not work and only serve to clog up the works? I don't really see the connection between linking images and fascism, to be honest. I'm not a fan of onerous copyright regimes but it's not like linking images is a fundamental right (any more than copying music illegally is, which is just as easy). I don't see the newspaper analogy—it's more like sending someone an MP3 over e-mail. Easy to do, but not copyright kosher. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:41, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

It comes about in complicated ways. If I copy a picture of Mickey mouse from the Disney website onto the computer that runs my website so that this image shows up in my web page - then I've illegally copied that image and since I broke the copyright law - I'm in deep trouble. But suppose I put an HTML <IMG SRC="xxxx"> tag into my web page and instead of 'xxxx', I put the URL of a picture of Mickey Mouse from somewhere on the Disney web site - then I'm still going to be sued because the same picture of Mickey Mouse shows up on my web site. But when you think about it, I didn't copy that picture. The picture is still on Disney's computer and was inserted into that page on the user's computer when he visits that page - at no time did I copy the file - the image was never even sent to my computer! But it looks like I copied the image when I didn't - and the law has pretty much decided that it's still a breach of copyright to do that. Clearly, the law had to change to accomodate that obvious loophole - and it more or less has. But it gets tougher if I instead wrote <A HREF="xxxx">Click here to see Mickey Mouse<\A> - because now, the end user clicks on those words and goes off to a legitimate page on the Disney web site where the picture is. The legal case for the second of these being illegal is very fuzzy indeed...but some people have been successfully sued for doing that. The difficulty is that it's only a small step between that and me simply linking to the top level http://www.disney.com site - which has to be legal in order for the World Wide Web to function at all! But it's tricky - I think it's OK to link to their main "Mickey Mouse" page: http://disney.go.com/characters/#/characters/classics/bios/mickeymouse/ but I might be breaking the law by linking to their logo image: http://a.dolimg.com/media/en-US/globalmedia/legal_footer/images/games.png (although in this, specific case, I'm going to claim "fair use"). The law is exceedingly vague at this point. SteveBaker (talk) 07:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Is Finnegans Wake in the public domain?

Just curious about the copyright status of Finnegans Wake by James Joyce. Tried finding out myself but got confused. Thanks, ♠TomasBat 02:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

It is in the public domain in countries where copyright lasts 60 years after the author's death, such as Canada. Since it was published after 1923 it is not in the public domain in the United States. Marnanel (talk) 02:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

It depends on which jurisdiction you are talking about. In the U.K. it is not (70 years after author's death = 2011), in the U.S. it is not (95 years after publication = 2034), but in countries with 60 or shorter after author's death, then it is. Whichever country you are in determines the laws you have to abide by (see Berne Convention). --Mr.98 (talk) 01:24, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

A Dessert That Looks Like Turkish Delight

What is the ingredient called "matica" or something found in a transluecent dessert that is not as colorful as Turkish Delight?174.3.98.236 (talk) 03:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Do you mean Mastic? Nanonic (talk) 03:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Our local Turkish supermarket sells Turkish delight described as "mastic flavour". As I could only think of the mastic which is used in sanitary plumbing, it was a bit of a puzzle to me but all is now clear. Alansplodge (talk) 11:29, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Significance of "z"

What is the significance of adding a "z" at the last of a word. I have noticed these in many blogs and social networking sites. For example:

• "better" is written as "betterz" or "bettarz"
• "navel" is written as "navelz"
• "boys" is written as "boyz"
• "girls" is written as "girlz"

What is the meaning of this? When should I use spelling like these? --Qoklp (talk) 03:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Neverz.  :) -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 04:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

They're all evolved forms of Leet since it's entry into mainstream conciousness and it's application to various internet memes such as lolcats. The S->Z transformation can be traced back as far as the word Warez and possibly earlier. Nanonic (talk) 04:17, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

For plurals, that's the way it's pronounced. "boys" is not pronounced "boy" + "s"; it's pronounced "boy" + "z". I guess writing it as boys emphasizes the plural. --99.237.234.104 (talk) 04:31, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

As an occasional user of the naughty z, I'd say it just emphasizes the silly. 218.25.32.210 (talk) 05:03, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Text-only communication is difficult. We don't have good ways to express tone, emotion or intent by intonation as we do in normal speech. When humans invented writing, it wasn't intended to be used for informal conversation - but here in the Internet, that's almost the only way it's used! We're gradually finding ways to add back what we're missing from spoken language. Emoticons and adoptions from "Leet-speak" is often used to add 'flavor' to bland text. There are hundreds of these things out there in the online world: Sometimes I'll say "Mmmm'k" instead of "OK" to indicate some doubt about what I'm supposed to be agreeing with...that's not in any English dictionary, grammar or style guide (I think it started in South Park) - but it expresses something that's tough to say in mere words. Sometimes I'll say something and follow it with a bunch of ^H^H^H^H^H's - which (for incredibly complicated reasons) means that the preceding word is one that I've humorously left in the text when I "really meant" to delete it. So I might say humorously say "Qoklp is an idiot^H^H^H^H^H really smart person" - meaning that "officially" I'm not calling this person an idiot - although that's what I really think. In many places, TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS IS CONSIDERED TO BE "SHOUTING".

So, similarly, replacing the 's' with a 'z' is a way of lightening tone, expressing silliness and sometimes adding a nuance of meaning that wasn't there before.

As for when you should do it - well, don't! Not until you've absorbed enough of the culture of the group you're talking to to know what their conventions are. For example, here on the Misplaced Pages reference desk, we've developed a possibly unique convention that writing things in small text indicates that a response is intended as a joke. You don't see that in many other places and if you just start sticking small font jibes at people into non-Misplaced Pages reference desk posts, or "crossing out" the word "idiot" with ^H's then you may end up seriously upsetting someone who expects to see a smiley-face emoticon instead.

Like verbal 'slang', these conventions come and go - and are geographically unique (although the word "geography" takes on a different meaning on the Internet where Misplaced Pages talk pages and FaceBook blogs are like different countries with their own dialects and accents).

SteveBaker (talk) 06:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

My wife, incidentally, would take issue with the idea that is that written language is devoid of emotional cues. People have been using written communication extensively for a long time now—even "common" people have for the last 150 years or so. Yet it is only with these electronic gizmos that people start feeling the need to pepper everything with graphics and misspellings as a way to indicate emotional states, sarcasm, etc. She sees this as a decline of language instruction and people taking the easy way out. (There are plenty of ways to indicate emotional cues in writing—writers have been doing that for centuries.) I agree with her maybe 50%; I see some of this as a problem that people are writing now who wouldn't have done so in the past in any significant amounts, and really don't know how to do any kind of evocative writing, which is a somewhat different way to phrase the problem. Horrifically, though, one sees this kind of language being put by college students in their term papers, smilies and all, because that's the only way they know how express themselves in text... THAT, I refuse to accept, as a teacher! --Mr.98 (talk) 13:31, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm pleased to see I'm not the only one clinging to the outdated^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H subtle nuances of "^H". — Lomn 15:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Which we oldsters remember as the backspace on the old teletype machines. "^" being the control key). 67.51.38.51 (talk) 16:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Though Steve has a good point about "geographical" meaning, such things can also have a temporal location. I doubt many younger internet users would get the joke about ^H being a backspace that would delete previous characters (removing them from the screen on VDU terminals, but displaying literally as "^H" if you has a teleprinter that simultaneously printed on paper). I think it goes back to the days of typewriters where you could backspace the carriage head and overtype what you had just written, typically with hyphen characters. A similar effect can be achieved using the Wiki markup like this: "Qoklp is an <s>idiot</s> really smart person" and appears as "Qoklp is an idiot really smart person". Astronaut (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The Z for S substitution predates 1337-speak by at least a few decades, if not more. Boyz II Men was one of the most popular singing groups of the late 1980's, back when the interwebz was basically where a few defense industry computer geeks hung out. Heavy D and The Boyz comes from around the same time. People over at The Language Desk would probably be able to dig up some much older refs for this. I would not be shocked to find such misspellings, intentional or not, to date from many many many years before now. Oddly enough, slang and cute misspellings existed longer than the internet did. Heck, the term Okay has been said to be an abbreviation of "all correct" ("oll korrect"), as an intentional cutesy misspelling, for a long time, and serious etymologists consider that a very likely scenario. It would be no different than the s/z switch here. --Jayron32 21:03, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

(Replying to a comment above) Sure, there are ways of expressing emotion in writing, but until the last decade or so written communication were read days or weeks after being composed. The writer usually puts a good deal of time into a book or letter, so fleeting emotions that last for seconds aren't written down. In contrast, it takes only a second to type a message on MSN, so it's necessary to express these fleeting, seconds-long emotions, something that written English has never been used for. --99.237.234.104 (talk) 01:06, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I used to belong to a youth-organized and youth-run gay youth group back in the early '80s (back when it was still fairly risky and radical to come out). One of our guerilla awareness-raising campaigns was to tag various public places around our city (such as subway stations) with the words "GAY KIDZ" in magic marker as graffiti. (Yes, I know, it was vandalism, but if it made parents think twice or other kids realize they weren't alone, we felt it was worth it.) I think we felt "gay kidz" looked cooler than "gay kids". Marco polo (talk) 02:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Royal Inbreeding

Are Hawaiian royalties more inbred than Charles II of Spain? Charles II descent from only from about 200 years of inbreeding between cousins and cousins and aunts/uncles and nieces/nephews so he was deformed. Hawaiian royalties descend from all unions described above and half-brothers and half-sister marriages even a full sibling marriage and a daughter and father marriage in the span of less than 100 years, but they were not known to have any deformaties founded in Bourbons. KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Inbreeding tends to emphasize genetic defects, but it can't cause them. Charles II had a great many ancestors with the defects causing the Habsburg lip, so the inbreeding in his ancestry served to focus the effects. On the other hand, the Hawaiian royals (and another famously inbred dynasty, the Ptolemaic dynasty) presumably didn't have any genetic defects that cause deformities, so there's no reason for deformities to appear. --Carnildo (talk) 02:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

If a negative trait only manifests itself when an individual has inherited double recessive forms of a gene, then interbreeding can greatly increase the number of double-recessive descendants of people who had one dominant and one recessive (and so appeared perfectly healthy).... AnonMoos (talk) 05:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. What inbreeding does is reduce genetic variation. That tends to make the expression of recessive traits more likely. Dominant negative traits quickly get bred out of the gene pool, while recessive negative traits don't (since people with only one copy of the gene can reproduce with no difficulty). That means most negative traits are recessive. That means having more recessive traits tends to mean having more negative traits. A lack of genetic diversity also means that the entire population (or family in this case) is likely to be susceptible to the same infections, increasing the chance of them all being wiped out at once. (When an entire population is inbred it also means it can't evolve as quickly to deal with changes in environment, since the now-beneficial traits don't exist anywhere in the population so you have to wait for mutations that could take hundreds of generations rather than just having an existing trait spread throughout the population over a few generations. That isn't really an issue with a single family, though, especially when we can use technology to deal with changes.) --Tango (talk) 05:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

WW2 Casualty Rates by type of land unit? (infantry / tank / artillery)

I already have a pretty good idea of how things went for the naval and air arms, hence their omission. I'm wondering, if one was drafted (or volunteered) into a major power's armed forces during WW2, what were the relative chances of survival? Was it better to be infantry or a tanker? Artillery seems the safest, unless you get overrun... then you're really SOL eh? I know these figures will vary widely depending on which nation we talk about, but I'd be happy with some good info for ANY of the major European combatants... thank you! 218.25.32.210 (talk) 06:10, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Which nation's military are you most interested in? The rates would probably be very different for the different nations. Germany's tank survival rates could be very different from the UK, or the US, or Japan. Googlemeister (talk) 15:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Either America/UK or Germany on the Western Front in 1944 onwards would be interesting. 218.25.32.210 (talk) 00:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Without checking my sources, something like 90% of combat casualties in World War II-era armies were suffered by the infantrymen. While tank losses where high, tank crewmen had surprisingly low casualties - most tank crews escaped unscathed when their tanks were destroyed. Nick-D (talk) 08:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Archives

What remarkable things happened during the period of June 8th- 14th 1992?137.81.40.184 (talk) 08:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

According to our 1992 article, not much. The first World Ocean Day was held on 8 June. And your time span narrowly misses the infamous spelling flub, on 15 June, by Dan Quayle who said that "potato" is spelled with an "e". Is there a specific area, either geographic or topical, that you were interested in? Dismas| 09:23, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Earth Summit (1992). Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Not all that much: the start of a major tornado outbreak in the U.S., the start of the UEFA championships, an election in Indonesia, George Bush Sr visited Panama but left after there was rioting nearby. Warofdreams talk 12:16, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I've seldom seen as much overkill on a minor mistake as the "potatoe" thing. It is or was a valid though seldom-used alternate spelling. Quayle made plenty of gaffes as it was. I too would like to know why the questioner is asking, as that might help us provide more information. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 20:37, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

prime minister

who is the pm if australia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simbusiva (talk • contribs) 09:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

See Prime Minister of Australia. By the way, you could have Googled this yourself and found out much faster than by posting your question here and waiting for someone to respond. Dismas| 09:12, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be Ricky Ponting ? Or maybe Robbie Deans ? The Russian Christopher Lilly 14:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I thought it was Bruce. — The Hand That Feeds You: 19:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Crown Lands of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Crown lands of France is a great article, for a defunct monarchy to boot, but I am dismayed to not know of any similar article or website which might have the same information for the British Isles (a region that actually still has a monarchy over most of the land), for the Anglo-Irish, Scottish or Manx monarchs, although I have seen some maps of Wales and Cornwall which delineate those issues, such as between the Prince of Wales, Earl of March and also the Duke of Lancaster. Please help me find information, especially in pictures, which may show me the Crown lands irrespective of any particular title, although I am aware that the Lancastrian inheritance does in fact have its own peculiar title with respect to the Crown. What would be even more helpful, is if somebody could actually make these articles. I don't know if this should be referred to another page at Misplaced Pages for article requests or whatnot. Cheers! 70.171.236.188 (talk) 10:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The main article is at Crown Estate. There are some maps at that organisation's website - here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Interesting. It seems that there are no longer any broad swathes of territory held by the Crown anymore, but a map showing the expansion and contraction of their possessions isn't at that website. It's amazing how the French history is extensive, yet an extant monarchy has little of the same coverage. Thanks anyway. Perhaps somebody else knows, or has access to records so they can make graphics for Misplaced Pages Commons, just like the article I referenced above. 70.171.236.188 (talk) 11:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

There are several books in existence on what, before the 20th century, tended to be called the "Royal demesne". The only relevant historical information at the Crown Estate site seems to be that:

"After the Norman Conquest, all the land belonged to William "in right of The Crown" because he was King. Despite centuries of change in law and custom, the underlying ownership of The Crown still exists and there is always a presumption in favour of The Crown unless it can be proved that the land belongs to someone else. The Sovereign's estates had always been used to raise revenue, and over time large areas were granted to nobles. The estate fluctuated in size and value but by 1760, when George III acceded to the throne, the asset had been reduced to a small area producing little income..."

Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:16, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

So, does this directly tie into English enclosures and Scottish clearances, the eviction of Irish from their lands and the penal transportations to the Province of Georgia and New South Wales? Has land mostly reverted to commoners now, rather than remain in the hands of powerful parliamentarians? 70.171.236.188 (talk) 12:15, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Looks like you need this book: --TammyMoet (talk) 12:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I think people here are totally confusing two different concepts. There's the "royal desmesne" which is what the Crown lands of France is discussing, which is basically those lands over which the French King has "effective sovereign control" as a legal Head of State and then there's the "Land which the crown owns outright as a private posession of the Crown". For much of history, the Kingdom of France operated much closer to how the Holy Roman Empire did; that is the King was a nominal ruler over all of France, but only had effective control over a small area, and the local rulers were essentially sovereign over their own territories even if they were nominally fiefs of the French King. This makes sense because the HRE (essentially the "Kingdom of Germany") and France share a common ancestor, the Frankish state of Francia.

It also helps to remember that the King of France grew out of the title of "Duke of France", i.e. ruler of Île de France (Paris), which was just another Duchy of Francia. The fact that the Dukes of France also became the Mayors of the Palace of the Frankish kings and that they also came to rule the most important Duchy in West Francia had a lot to do with how they became Kings of France. Though the Ducal title evolved into the "King of France", historically the other duchies in West Francia had just as much claim to their own territories as the King had to the Île de France. In other words, though the Duke of France began calling himself the King of France, and thus claimed nominal suzerainity over the other dukes and counts and whatevers around France, those other rulers basically said "What makes THAT guy more special than us?" In fact, during the early years of the Kingdom of France, there were other such territories that just up and called themselves "Kingdoms", including the Kingdom of Burgundy and Kingdom of Provence (later merged as the Kingdom of Arles). The process of the evolution of the Kingdom of France into a strong, central monarchy coincides with the timeline laid out in the Crown lands of France article, essentially that article is much more about the centralization of power into the French King rather than a timeline of the private posessions of the crown.

The Crown Estate article is just about the private lands owned by the British Crown; this has nothing to do with the territory over which the monarch has effective sovereign control. The history of the centralization of power in England is very different from that in France, and its feudal organization was always different than that on the continent (see Bastard feudalism for the pecularly British version of the feudal system) since Continental feudalism grew out of the organization of the Frankish Empire, and England was never, ever part of that empire. --Jayron32 03:19, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I know well what you mean, so please try to understand my question. The Crown's original fief was Wessex and in that, Winchester--just as before, when the centre was Tamworth in Mercia. I wish to know a similar history of fluctuation in territories for England here. I am aware of some maps which show Crown lands in Scotland vis a vis the mormaerdoms and will have to go look them up again, but I'm pretty sure there aren't any maps showing the progressive loss or accumulation of these lands. I have an atlas which show Tudor Crown lands in juxtaposition from Church and private lands, but this is only for the mid-16th century. I also have a map which shows the major holdings of the Lancastrian and Yorkist competitors, but of course, this is only the mid-15th century as well. I suppose we would have to assemble a mix of different maps in order to come to some greater understanding as to what the landscape looks like in the court rolls and the livery badges. 70.171.236.188 (talk) 06:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but we don't know what you mean? Do you mean you are looking for the 1) territorial changes of the Kingdom of England or those lands that were the 2) personal property of the English Crown. Those have different meanings. Even #1 would be hard to nail down, as the Plantagenet Kings of England also controlled substantial territory in the Kingdom of France which was not part of the Kingdom of England (see Hundred Years War), but rather land held in fief of the King of France (though, as noted above, rather independent from...). So, for example, Henry II of England was also the Duke of Aquitaine, but the latter title was not part of his English posessions. However, many maps and history books oversimplify this situation, treating all Plantagenet lands as part of "England", even if they weren't.

The deal is, with a few minor changes around the Scottish Borders, the Kingdom of England maintained a relatively constant territory for most of its history. There were some English fiefs which maintained a special legal relationship to the Kingdom (Lancaster, Durham, and Cornwall comes to mind, see County palatine), but I am not sure these ever reached the level of independence that most of the German or French fiefdoms did. --Jayron32 07:49, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

How were East Anglia, Mercia and Northumbria assimilated into Crown domain? After all, there were still earls and then dukes of Northumberland, earls of March, etc. I understand that these titles have been regranted even if the King held them once or twice. How could Wales be assimilated into the Crown if there is still a Principality and Marches? Just because the Crown has suzerainty and de facto control, doesn't mean it has de jure control or actual possession. 70.171.236.188 (talk) 14:24, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Prior to the Norman Conquest, the ruler of "England" was really the "King of the English" or "King of the Anglo-Saxons", that is the king of the people of England, not of the territory (see Popular Monarchy). There were actually several kingdoms on the island, as you note, and at times, one of the Kings would be declared "Bretwalda" or "High King", that is "King of All of the Anglo-Saxons". However, this office was originally not heritable, and different Kings from different Kingdoms held the title at different times. Alfred the Great made the Bretwaldaship the permanent ownership of the Kings of Wessex, by claiming the title "King of the Anglo Saxons", though it had functionally been so since his predecessor Egbert of Wessex. The title stayed as such, with at least nominal recognition of the seperate existance of the constituent Kingdoms of England until the Norman Conquest (with the notable exception of the Empire of Cnut and his relatives). Once William the Conquerer came into power, he swept away most of the Anglo-Saxon administrative and political organization, and replaced it whole sale with a Norman-French one. It was with William that the title went from "King of the English" to "King of England", and even the nominal seperate existance of the old Anglo-Saxon kingdoms (Mercia, East Anglia, etc) disappeared. ] was incorporated into England functionally during the reign of Edward Longshanks and officially with the Laws in Wales Acts 1535–1542. Scotland, as you know, came into personal union with England during the reign of James I and VI and the two states ended their seperate existance with the formation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain via the Acts of Union 1707. --Jayron32 18:03, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid we've gotten off topic. The first replies by Ghymrtle and TammyMoet were on track. I shall rephrase for direct context: When did Wessex no longer form the body of the Royal Demesne within England (not France, as English holdings there were the same as Irish (Robert, Duke of Ireland, Earl of Oxford), Scottish (William, King of Scots, Earl of Northumbria/Huntingdon/Northampton) and Manx (William, King of Mann, Earl of Salisbury) holdings in England), or did it ever and what, if so, did take its place and when? Would the Late Saxon switch to London (Danelaw sway over the seat of government) be the time when the Royal Demesne shifted and what body of lands would that be called, or was Westminster simply the working capital of England, whilst Wessex remained the country estate of the Crown? Compare the two centres of government in the Netherlands; Amsterdam and the Hague--one could see Winchester as the Royal capital and Westminster as the Witanagemot/Curia Regis/Parliamentary capital. Norman surnames are most numerous in Wessex and that is where the Lady Matilda had her strongest support (albeit with Robert of Gloucester's help otherwise) versus King Stephen, who was based in London and perhaps, likewise had support in the Danish countryside of England, as in the era previous. 70.171.236.188 (talk) 07:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Australian recipe

Does anyone know the Australian name of the recipe that consists of picking a selection of tins whose labels have all been eaten by ants or termites, and then trying to make a meal out of them? — PhilHibbs | talk 14:27, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

That's the most bizarre damn thing I've ever heard of. Are you sure this is an Australian ... er, practice (I hesitate to call it a "recipe")? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 14:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

What if one of the cans turns out to be dog food? Or worse, SPAM? Googlemeister (talk) 14:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I vote for "bizarre damn thing" too. Something to do with 'Hobos' comes to mind, Ah! "Mulligan Stew"? But that is an American term. I was actually going to suggest "Pot Luck" "Potluck"! --220.101.28.25 (talk) 15:30, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

That scenario sounds vaguely familiar - a joke from a movie, or a sit-com, or something like that. And not to do with Australia. But "pot luck" would be a good term for it. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 17:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The term "Hash Magandi" (or "Magandy") comes to mind. I think it means anything that comes to hand thrown in a pot. I beleive this is a military term, but whether this is specifically Australian or not I don't know. Google couldn't shed much light on it. Another similar idea is "airborne stew" (many references on Google but no definitions - ignore the ones that mean mixed air-pollution). It's the sort of thing that old ex-army Scout leaders used to reminisce about. Alansplodge (talk) 17:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm reminded of the story of a British family during the Second World War receiving an unlabelled tin from their Canadian relatives. Upon opening, it contained a grey powder, which they assumed was a dried soup of some sort, and duly boiled it up with some water. The soup was a bit thin and gritty, but any variety in the diet was welcomed in times of rationing. A couple of days later a letter arrived from Canada, telling them that their elderly relative had died, and his last wish was for his ashes to be scattered in the Mother Country, and the family had sent them under seperate cover in an unlabelled tin. DuncanHill (talk) 18:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Agreeing with Bugs here, I'm certain I've seen this somewhere before. The Simpsons and Look Who's Talking spring immediately to mind, but it's entirely possible they simply had similar scenes to the one I'm picturing in my mind, without mentioning unlabelled tinned food. This is going to drive me mad...! Vimescarrot (talk) 19:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

On a hunch, I googled , and it's not cans, but it's the same idea: The Label Maker episode. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 20:15, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Not heard of "hash magandi", but it's presumably a blend of salmagundi. --ColinFine (talk) 22:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I loves mah Hash Magandi. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The Potluck article suggest a few synonyms, for itself ; potluck dinner, Jacob's join, Jacob's supper, faith supper, covered dish supper, pitch-in, carry-in, bring-a-plate, fuddle. But this is more of an informal dinner gathering with all contributing a dish. This link may interest, Origin of potluck Quote "Meal leftovers would be put into a pot and kept warm". 220.101.28.25 (talk) 06:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Burgoo? American again. I vote "bloody unlikely" :-), the OPs original idea it was from Oz. (Though could be a 'traditional' word that has fallen out of use) --220.101.28.25 (talk) 08:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

My question is, what if you have plenty of tinned food but all the labels are intact? Or, you have tins with missing labels, but the reason they lost their labels had nothing to do with ants and termites? Are you supposed to place a pile of assorted tins of food in some place where ants and termites can get to them, and then wait for a few months? What if you're starving right now? And since you know what they contain when you expose them to the ants and termites, how do you forget that you ever knew what was in them when you eventually retrieve them and open them? This is a real philosophical conundrum, this one. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 10:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

You guys need to get some more clarity from the OP on where he heard about this. Otherwise you're just chasing your tails. --Richardrj 10:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Should such a request for clarity go to his talk page, or be kept here? Either way, the guy edits only occasionally. 2 edits in the last week, and only about a dozen in the last 3 months. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The cons have it

Could anyone please tell me the name of the New Zealander who ran a Ponzi style investment scheme in the US, and about whom there was a movie made ? This film portrayed him playing a ruse on leading businessmen in Australia by ringing up a radio station and claiming he was a big time investor. He also tried to have something to do with rebuilding the World Trade Center. Also, if anyone knows the name of the other guy who conned millions out of investors in a salted gold mine he cooked up in Asia, then allegedly faked his death by jumping from a helicopter after getting his money out. Also, the American who tried to fake his death on the Cook Strait ferry in the 1980's, as well as the guy killed in a car crash in the Mount Victoria tunnel in Wellington, who was found to have a briefcase full of money, making the whole thing look very cloak and dagger. I have tried typing them in, but nothing. Thanks . The Russian Christopher Lilly 14:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Category:Pyramid and Ponzi schemes may help, if you're prepared to trawl through them all. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The gold mine fraud in Indonesia is the Bre-X scandal; it was not the principal but the chief geologist, Michael de Guzman, who allegedly jumped out of a plane (there are rumours that his death was faked, of course). It was a huge affair in Canada in the mid-1990s. Don't know about any of the others.--Xuxl (talk) 18:29, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank You. I saw it on a documentary, like Discovery Channel or American Greed, although I recall he was not American. Clever but wicked idea. Like the ones about Breaking Vegas, or the forgers, like the guy who counterfeited Canadian currency, and the other who faked One Armed Bandut tokens, and the other who worked out how to get those machines to pay up on command. Like something out of a movie. Even real life can be as intriguing as the films. If anyone can recall the others, please say so. Thanks. The Russian Christopher Lilly 11:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Calendar epoch at Easter?

In Spain, I encountered a date that the notice for tourists translated into a date 32 years or so apart. Is it possible that this date was counted from, say, the resurrection of Jesus? David.Monniaux (talk) 18:23, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

It would be helpful if you could be more specific. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 20:05, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I have a one-page list of "eras", and no such era appears in it–not that that means it doesn't exist. If the difference were in the other direction, the Era of Augustus is dated from the Battle of Actium in 31 BC. - Nunh-huh 20:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

January 26

Charity idea

I've had this idea for the last few days and I was wondering if anything like it has been implemented anywhere before. Basically, there would be a database of people who, while they may have a few extra dollars every week, are essentially living paycheck to paycheck. And if they could get maybe one credit card bill or car loan paid off, then they would be able to have a bit more breathing room and maybe even have some savings. So, they'd sign up and pay in to the system maybe $5-10 per month. And each month, the organization would choose one person to be paid all this money. So, say you had 100 people in the group and each paid in $10. So, that month a person gets chosen and receives the $990 (not including their $10 since it was their month). Then the next month, it goes to the next person on the list and so on. Granted, there would have to be more rules and regs but basically, I think you get my idea. And of course, the groups would have to remain relatively small otherwise it might take years for someone to get to "their month". Even at 100 people, that would be a while to go all the way around. But anyway, has anything like this ever been done? Dismas| 02:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Depending on how much "administrative costs" the group managing your scheme takes "off the top", this essentially sounds like a type of Ponzi scheme. --Jayron32 02:51, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

(EC)I see where you're coming from. But to be honest, if we change the conditions only very slightly, we end up with a friendly society, in which for regular payments one can be entitled to a loan; or change them again and we have a lottery. Change them once more and we arrive at premium bonds. I think you can see the seeds of the destruction of your own scheme, too. You'll get the $990 at a less than optimum time. And you'll probably have a job making everyone stick to the 100 payments necessary - a problem that does not affect the more scalable examples in my answer. Bottom line, for me, it's utopian & hence will not work.

Meanwhile I don't think it is anything like a Ponzi scheme. Let's assume the admin costs are, say, $900 per week. The payout if $90 per week. So long as everyone understands that, there is no Ponzi element whatsoever. Ponzi typically depends upon converting money received from new investors to pay interest to previous investors. Simply having humongous admin fees is not the same thing at all. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

It sounds like a korean kye, though on a smaller scale. See this Straight Dope article, as well as this explanation here. Both pages stress that strong ties among the different parties are necessary to ensure that no one reneges. Buddy431 (talk) 04:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

If you modify it so that you only get the $990 when you need it... then it's just (poorly organized) insurance. --Mr.98 (talk) 04:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

No wealth is created by this scheme, so I fail to see any benefit. Why doesn't everyone just use that $10 a month to pay off their own debt? By the end of the scheme, everyone will be in the same position as they would have been without the scheme. All that is different is that some people got to pay off their debt sooner than they otherwise could, so pay less interest, and others paid it off in one lump sum at the end of the scheme rather than regular instalments, so paid more interest. It just creates inequality, that's all. It's just a (possibly deterministic) lottery, except with a high enough chance of winning that you can expect everyone to win eventually and a rule that says you can't stop playing after you win. --Tango (talk) 05:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say it would work or made financial sense or that I had all the details ironed out. I just thought my idea was slightly novel and was looking for similar ideas. Dismas| 08:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

This system probably doesn't make sense where you have access to banks (it would be more efficient if everyone just pay the $10 to their bank account every month). It can be a good idea where access to other types of saving does not exist, though, as the system does not have to "store" the money anywhere. For an abstract discussion of systems looking somewhat like your idea, including the problem of people leaving the system, see this academic paper. Jørgen (talk) 08:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks all for the helpful links and such! Dismas| 08:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

There's nothing new under the sun, Dismas, but you get cred for having a positive idea. This is virtually identical to how a Starr-Bowkett Society operates. Or did. That was how my Dad got his first home loan, and I still remember my by then slightly dotty grandmother, well into the 1980s, decades after they became defunct, telling me to "Join a Starr-Bowkett, my boy, and you won't go far wrong". It's been literally 25 years since I was last consciously aware of thinking about Starr-Bowkett Societies, so "thanks for the memories". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 10:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

This idea is implemented in various parts of the world, and was the topic of an NPR Planet Money podcast. I believe the episode was Making A Life On $2 A Day; the comments about "RSCAs" refer to this sort of savings club. -- Coneslayer (talk) 12:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Rotating Savings and Credit Association--Nricardo (talk) 03:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't find it at RSCA. I added a disambiguation link there. -- Coneslayer (talk) 12:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I think this is how the earliest building societys (forgive spelling) operated in Britain. The money was to buy a house rather than pay off debt. Now the building societies have enough money up front to lend you, and they have turned into banks. 92.24.54.79 (talk) 22:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hurricane Katrina special

Exactly how much money was raised to help Hurricane Katrina victims on the 2005 Larry King Live three-hour special "How You Can Help"?24.90.204.234 (talk) 05:56, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Print a verse of a poem.

How can I get printed on my screen the verse of Twas the night before Christmas? Thank you Gerald Buckley <contact info redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.189.32.54 (talk) 07:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean by "printed on the screen"? Do you mean like a picture of the text that you could use as wallpaper? Or do you mean a website that contains the words? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 07:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The article A Visit from St. Nicholas (the actual title of that poem) contains the full text of the poem, if you click the "show" link in the little blue box (as it is almost 200 years old, the text is in the public domain.) Even easier, if you type "A Visit from St. Nicholas" or even "'Twas the Night Before Christmas" into http://www.google.com you get an uncountable number of websites with the full text. --Jayron32 07:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

wikisource:A Visit from St. Nicholas. --Tango (talk) 07:37, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

He also asked this question (under a different IP, but same city) at the Help Desk. Probably best to keep it here. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 07:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Joseph or JOSFH camp in Vavuniya

Somebody told me that the Joseph camp in Vavuniya actually had nothing to do with somebody or something called "Joseph", but that it referred to "joint operation" something. I could not find much reliable confirmation on the web, but here is a reference to "the Joseph camp (Note: the reference is to the former JOSFH or Joint Operations Security Forces Headquarters) in Vavuniya". However, this 2008 report from the French asylum agency uses the name "camp Joseph" and says that nobody knows its meaning, but that there is a "Joseph Lane" in the vicinity of the camp. There are also references to a JOSSOP (Joint Services special operation) camp . Is there any reliable source on the correct name of this camp and its origin ? Apokrif (talk) 16:03, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Geography Question

Pl help me identify the nation

1. It was once part of a much larger group, it continually fought outsider control and finally became independent 2. It actually received significant financial assistance for a number of years but the assistance is again under review by its major benefactor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.74.9 (talk) 13:03, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Could be any of the countries of the former Soviet Union. --Richardrj 13:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Or any former British or French colony. Googlemeister (talk) 14:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Could be Iraq. Or Israel. (Both once under British rule, right?) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Israel has never been under British rule. Palestine and Iraq were mandated, basically rule (some people disagree). - Jarry1250  20:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Or Haiti. --TammyMoet (talk) 15:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

There is also Madagascar, for which aid is now under review because of what most foreign governments see as an illegal coup. Marco polo (talk) 16:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Every time this user asks this type of question, someone asks the user to tell us where the questions come from so we can better provide an answer. The user has rudely and stubbornly refused to explain where the questions come from. Therefore, it is not necessary to list every possible country that could match the criteria. One is good enough. -- kainaw™ 18:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually it was pointed out on one occasion that he's getting the questions from here. I assume the OP pledges to donate the $100 prize to Misplaced Pages? Karenjc 19:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, Karenjc. I had missed it. No more help on these quiz questions (from me, anyway). Comet Tuttle (talk) 00:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

This also came up on Misplaced Pages talk:Reference desk. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 03:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, the sure cure would be to keep supplying answers that we're certain are wrong. For example, one answer to this question could be "Zsa Zsa Gabor". :) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 03:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Or just wait until it is over and say: I know. I know. Palau. -- kainaw™ 13:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Say if it really was so, Joe.

Having watched Band of Brothers, I was impressed by the first episode, Currahee, which showed the members of the 101st ready to embark for that unfortunate debacle ( not their fault ) in Nomandy. They showed Englishmen dressed up as German SS and other such. Good idea to familiarise the men as to whom they would be coming up against, but did this really happen, given that although the miniseries is based on fact, the article states there were some historical inaccuracies and licences. I have tried to look everywhere to find out, but nothing. I also realise this could be considered an Entertainment question, but ultimately I am asking about a possible historical fact. And if this was true, and say the Germans had captured the south west of England, would they have shot the cockney gent in question, considering his intention in wearing the uniform was not to spy, but to educate ? Not that legal details like that ever concerned the Nazis, considering Hitler's Commando Order. Thanks, The Russian Christopher Lilly 13:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I expect that he would have been shot - as would a German caught by the Allies in a British or an American uniform. I don't think in this case the Nazis would have acted any harsher than the Allies. The Geneva Conventions are thin on details but spies are apparently required to be given a trial under the earlier Hague Regulations though. Rmhermen (talk) 15:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Interesting link about Allies in German uniforms here. Alansplodge (talk) 16:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

And here, a soldier who dressed as a German as a film extra. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alansplodge (talk • contribs) 16:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Training exercises would almost certainly have been abandoned if the Germans had actually invaded Britain (or at least moved further from the front line) so your hypothetical cockney would have been very unlucky to be in the middle of a training exercise in a German uniform right when the German paratroops drop. Also they probably didn't wear German uniforms except when actually on the training grounds, to avoid the reverse problem of a 'German' being shot by an overzealous Home Guard solider. If you are in a German uniform when real Germans suddenly arrive you would probably take off enough of the German uniform so as to make sure your own side didn't shoot at you. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

german spies would be expected (at the very least) to speak German, and to actually be trying to pass themselves off as german soldiers and infiltrate german ranks. some poor, hapless dogfoot who got caught in a german uniform would probably be treated like any other PoW. --Ludwigs2 09:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I guess, if the cockney portrayed on Band of Brothers had been captured before taking off his uniform by a more decent German, I suspect they would hold a court martial to determine if his intention had been as a spy - which in the context shown on the programme in question, it was not. I wondered about whether some of his own side might shoot him, mistaking him for the real thing, but I think ( although maybe unreasonably ) that the allies would have thought the thing through before getting the man to don the uniform.

I assume this really did happen as shown at Upottery, which as I said, was a good idea. As for spies, they get what they deserve if caught, as the Geneva Convention itself says - I have seen photos of the executions of the SS men who caused mayhem at the Battle of the Bulge - as long as there is a proper trial. Sometimes a bit much to hope for on the side of the Nazis especially, considering the kangaroo courts Freisler ran in the name of the Fuhrer, but then, Nuremberg itself should have dealt with all war crimes - not just those of the enemy. Not that I would have wanted allied spies to be shot, but if those are the rules, the spy should know them, then they can't complain when caught.

One interesting thing was a documentary I saw about a British officer who tried to escape Colditz Castle by dressing up as one of the more famous German guards all the men knew. The ruse was spotted, and he was marched back to his cell, but was not shot as a spy. I suspect his intention in wearing the faked German uniform was not to spy, but to escape, but I assumed the Germans would not see the distinction. It appears in this case they did. But then, with the Great Escape, the Germans did execute others who were clearly not spies. Thank You all for Your help. The Russian Christopher Lilly 12:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Colditz was a camp for officers. The Nazis treated different groups of prisoners very differently, as even a swift think will reveal, and would have treated officers with greater care than enlisted men. That said, I'm unconvinced they'd really have shot enlisted men for using a uniform as a ruse. From my vague memory of Pat Reid's book, when they used fake uniforms, they ditched them immediately they were out of the castle compound. --Dweller (talk) 14:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Finance: Comparing exchange rates and import-export data

Hello fine folks! I have a homework assignment where I have to chart the export import data for india over the years and compare it to the exchange rate over those years and see any correlation and match that to theory. I am not entirely sure what exchange rate figures I should use because the exchange rate fluctuates daily whereas export import figures are yearly. Should I use the mean? Or something else? What will be the best metric for this comparision? Any help will be deeply appreciated. --ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 15:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Export and import data are generally available on an annual basis (sometimes more often, but using quarterly figures would complicate your task needlessly). I agree that the exchange-rate figures are the trickiest. First, there is the question which exchange rate to use. The US dollar exchange rate will be affected by fluctuations in the dollar that have nothing to do with India's trade balance. The same is true for any other individual currency. Therefore, I recommend that you use a trade-weighted index for the exchange rate, which is available from the Bank for International Settlements. The BIS data are monthly, which raises the question how best to compare this data with the annual trade data. You could calculate a mean for the year, but if your goal is to assess the impact of trade on exchange rates, it might make more sense to cite the weighted exchange rate for December of each year. However, this is a judgment call. Perhaps you should ask your instructor's advice on methodology. Marco polo (talk) 16:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much! Is it correct that trade figures are calculated at the end of the year - by using the end of year exchange rates? Because if that is so then it would make complete sense to proceed like you advise. ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 17:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

A reliable source should include a note on the basis for its figures. If your source is the Indian government, then I would think that the trade data would be reported in Indian rupees, which gives you a choice of how to figure the exchange rate, though I think year-end figures make sense if you are trying to capture the effect of the trade. If the Indian trade data come from an international agency and are expressed in terms of a currency other than rupees, then the agency should make clear its method for calculating those figures. However, I don't see a particular reason why you have to use the exchange rate as of, say, May 1 of a given year just because that was the rate your source used to convert its Indian data for that year. It would still be valid, I think, to use a year-end rate if you want to capture the effect of the trade balance on the exchange rate. Marco polo (talk) 18:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

It sounds like this is a pretty open task. Can you choose how you present this data? I'd be tempted to plot a line graph with two y-axes, one for the exchange rate and one for the trade, on left and right of the graph. That way you can plot all the monthly exchange-rate data in one colour, and all the year-end trade figures in another, and see if there are any patterns. This has the advantage of clearly showing the fluctuation in the exchange rate. 86.179.150.105 (talk) 01:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! That sounds like a very good idea for graphical representation (I can chose the presentation). In fact I have even managed to get hold of the the monthly export import data, as well as the monthly (dollar) average exchange rates. Now the only question is - is it meaningful to compare changes in exchange rate and export-import month-by-month? I mean is there a month-by-month variation in trade depending on exchange rate? 220.225.87.66 (talk) 10:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I’m afraid Marco polo is leading you astray. Using an index is going to give you nonsense results, and December only data will distort the actual results from all previous months. Given that the question is about trade, which is overwhelming conducted in US dollars, the relevant exchange rate is Rs:US$1. And, as you are looking at several periods, the proper rate to use is the period average. So, for 2004, don’t use the year-end (single hour or day) rate, but the average for the entire year. There’s a nifty calculator (free) at http://www.oanda.com/currency/historical-rates. Oh, and full disclosure: this is all original research, or as my boss calls it, “doing your job.” DOR (HK) (talk) 10:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I think it's time for a little disclosure... actually my instructor said she will mark me on the basis of my judgement on how to compare exchange rates to foreign trade. The period average was the first thing to come up in my mind - but it was too obvious so I thought I'd ask here. I know it's a little unethical, but I'm in a tight corner, I am usually very good :( 220.225.87.66

What percentage of anti-abortion Americans oppose the death penalty?

Thanks. 66.65.139.33 (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I googled and bunch of references came up, one of which could be a survey of the type you're asking about, but I haven't time to do that search right now. I did find this article interesting, though. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 19:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Vital statistics down through the ages ?!?

I am fairly certain that what I am looking for exists. I am probably using the wrong search key or search criteria.

I am looking for a summary page of the known vital statistics of mankind down through time.

I want to look up things like: How tall was the average ancient Roman? How much did he probably weigh? What was the life expectancy of an adult? What might have been the infant mortality rate? What diseases and other causes of death were most common? How does that compare to Chinese, Gauls etc. of the same period, of later or earlier periods?

Surely someone has assembled this kind of speculative reference based on skeletal remains etc. for the use of archaeologist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Case (talk • contribs) 20:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't know that this information has ever been collected in a single location, though it is readily available, usually in the form of anthropological comparisons to 'modern' man. you could probably find cross-historic comparisons for specific vital statistics - e.g. body size - with a simple google search, but I don't think you're going to find a compendious cross-historical, cross-cultural table anywhere. if you do, though, let me know - that would be interesting. --Ludwigs2 09:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I'd suggest you make a start by looking into the armour we have from each of those cultures and periods. --Dweller (talk) 14:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Registered Agent

What states DO NOT require that you have a registered agent or physical location open for business located within the state? Most publications say "almost all states" or "most states", so which states are the acception? If I have a business in California and am qualified with SOS office in all fifty states, which states will I not need to use my registered agent for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.43.168.68 (talk) 00:21, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Communism

My history textbook says that there are currently only 5 communist countries: China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam. However, I thought that Iran was also communist. --75.34.66.67 (talk) 01:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

While its arguable which countries were or are communist, I think its very hard to make a case for Iran. Iran currently is a weird mixture of autocratic republicanism and theocracy. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 01:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Autocracy, republicanism and theocracy are all systems of government. Communism is more of an economic system. If you use one of the more relaxed definitions of communism, you could have a communist state that used any of those systems of government. --Tango (talk) 01:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Iran is not Communist. See Iranian Revolution for more understanding about what type of government they have had in place since 1979—it explicitly rejects both Communism and liberal capitalism. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

But I thought that communism is the same as totalitarianism. --75.34.66.67 (talk) 01:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

• No. It might be said to be a type of totalitarianism, but not all totalitarianism is Communism. --jpgordon 01:28, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
• You're wrong both ways. Totalitarians Hitler and Mussolini were not communist, and many communists are not totalitarian. See e.g. Italian Communist Party. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 01:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

• The IP's comment has a curiously familiar ring. Regardless, in a multi-party state like Italy, or anyplace where there are free elections, they can't espouse totalitarianism or they wouldn't draw flies. But when one party rules with no opposition, regardless of whether it's communist or fascist, you're at great risk of getting totalitarianism. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 01:36, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

If you want to be strictly correct, there are no communist states. By definition, a communist state is one without any social or economic class divisions, and also no government (known as a Withering away of the state). The goal of modern "communist parties" is to bring about a future communist state. Communist party-run countries come in two flavors: So called "Marxist-Leninist" states, modeled after the Soviet Union, and "Maoist" states, modeled after China. Generally, the so-called "communist" states in Europe, Africa, and the Americas tend to be "Marxist-Leninist" in nature, while those of Asia tend to be "Maoist" in nature, with the notable historical exception of Mongolia, which under the Mongolian People's Revolutionary Party was clearly aligned in the "Soviet"-type of communism rather than the "Maoist"-type. During the 1990's, in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, most single-party communist states begrudgingly became multi-party systems, though many such states (Mongolia and Albania come to mind) still live under the strong influence of their communist parties, even if they are no longer single party communist states. In fact, the list the OP comes up with at the beginning, while simplistic in its understanding of what "communism" is, is roughly right, in that those 5 states are probably the only 5 remaining single-party-communist states left. But as noted, communism still has a strong presence in many multi-party republics. The OP is, of course, completely wrong about Iran. There were some very early, abortive attempts to establish a communist state in Iran, see Persian Socialist Soviet Republic. This was never a significant event in the history of Iran, and communism never really got a foothold there. --Jayron32 02:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

One other note on the above good discussion is that it's probably a stretch to claim that China is much of a communist country anymore. (Totalitarian, yes.) See "Socialism with Chinese characteristics", a euphemism if I've ever heard one. (That article needs plenty of fleshing out with a description of the actual situation on the ground, though.) Comet Tuttle (talk) 05:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

In what way is China still a communist country? Billionaire capitalists owning factories and abusing peasants and workers, with the aid of the army to suppress rebellions? How is North Korea a communist country, when it is a hereditary absolute monarchy? Edison (talk) 06:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

North Korea never was a communist country (except in that ham-handed American way of lumping everything from state socialism to Marxism under the rubric/epithet 'communist'). North Korea is a classic socialist dictatorship (e.g. an autocratic society with a single-party government that ostensibly tries to destroy class distinctions in society. China was once a bit closer to communism - as far as I can tell it used to be a sort of regional syndicalism overlaying the traditional Chinese political structure (rural/agrarian communities bound together through a remarkably strong central bureaucracy). China's been going through it's version of industrialization, however, and commercial centers like Shanghai and Beijing have developed a noteworthy capitalist class and strong democratic movements. I suspect over the next 20-30 years it will shift away from marxist philosophy towards some sort of communitarian democracy. who knows, though.

North Korea hasn't even had Marxism-Leninism as its principal guiding ideology for a long time. Under the older Kim, Juche largely supplanted classic Communist ideology, while under the younger Kim Songun has been pushing aside Juche to some degree. AnonMoos (talk) 14:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Iran is a self-styled Islamic republic. It has some strong republicish institutions, but in recent years the Islam-based branches of government have been expanding their control over the political system. liberal republicanism is pretty much a fading memory there. --Ludwigs2 09:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't agree with that last part. Iran was a lot more theocratic shortly after the Islamic revolution under Khomeini. Power has devolved to secular side, but even that secular side is a far cry from a free society. However, compared to most of their neighbors, Iran has a much more diverse and open political landscape. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:30, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Which Bank?

In this picture you can see Scotiabank on the right, excellent city center in the middle, but a bank on the left has it's name obscured. What is this bank?174.3.98.236 (talk) 04:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

And the building beyond to the right says "SALVATORI". This is in Port of Spain, a city in Trinidad and Tobago, right? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:19, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I think it is Frederick Street. The Excellent City Centre store is on 3-5 FS. Scotiabank is at 1 FS. So our bank, by my reckoning, is 7 FS, or perhaps 7-9FS. But I cannot get to a name yet. --Tagishsimon (talk) 04:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Here's a writeup about the Salvatori office building which was at Independence Square and Frederick Street, if that helps any. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

this page lists major banks in Trinidad & Tobago. My best guess is First Citizens Bank. --Jayron32 04:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

And here is a list of First Citizens branches, one of which is in Independence Square. --Jayron32 04:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Trouble is, their branch in that neck of the woods at 62 Independence Square does not match the Excellent City Centre at 3-5 Frederick Street. But it is the only ~ns bank I've found for POS. Oh - and the font doesn't match, and what is the green sign all about ... seems to say express? --Tagishsimon (talk) 04:30, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

How old is the picture? That writeup I posted above says something about the building being demolished in 2006. Unfortunately, Google Maps is inadequate at this point. I wonder why the OP wants to know? Maybe it's driving him nuts and he's bringing us along for the ride? :) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

this site lists the Excellent City Centre at Independence Square and NOT Frederick street. Maybe the ECC has entrances on both thoroughfares, and as such, would have an address BOTH on Frederick and Independence Square? --Jayron32 04:38, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Google Maps shows 62 Independence Square just north of Frederick, seemingly a couple or three doors away from the former Salvatori Building, as with the photo. So presumably that's Frederick in the picture. I'm no expert on cars, but they look 1990s or so. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Googling and then looking for images, this one shows that general street scene looking the other direction: You can see that same building, with the current version of the First Citizens Bank logo, so I think that's got it. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Holy shit. Three people just worked together as a team to idetify a building located thousands of miles away from any of them for an anonymous IP address. Seriously, I think I am going to cry. I don't know if its out of joy or depression. --Jayron32 05:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The wife always puts it in perspective by singing "Too Much Time on My Hands". :) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 05:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

It being a tad chilly in the midwestern USA, some of us just wish we were there. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 05:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Using that same image search, several pages in you can see the old bank logo, that green thing someone was pointing out earlier. I can't directly link to it for some odd reason. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 05:19, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Swazi Cultural Costume

How do you make the mahiya?174.3.98.236 (talk) 05:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Re edits

i have admitedly cotroversialy added to a number of discussion pages, even to my intial discredit in math rangeing somewhat against the dictum

First and formost as a psycologist i would like to apeal to you to allow the more stabbaly voiced original coments on the self harm page and the black comedy page.

these allow for the disting pointing to the word gaisha and originaly contianed reference to bdsm cross referenced to two films john wiliams `femail trouble` and `secutery`

wist the monica of bdsm may be in apropriate i would suggest it posible that the article i would like to reference a clasiscs reference to womanhood And found in the edit traces of the login firmbelevolence or abhorentlygood.

to save your dismisal. The article took a romantic view of marage as salavery placed title to woamn and paraled this with good service and in contrast untalented prostitiution

Once more apealing for a more direct solution to the isues of self harm, whair pornography of bdsm in my opinion apeals in many ways to misoginist deviance rarther than femail rights, thoug in this regard i state, without qualification the rythem method many women practice is based on cutting and as such has pertinant refernece. i can tell you this from the perspective of a cathloic boy who first asked to study psychology then asked to be grouped into the womans RE class.

I leave this matter in your hands.

Sincerly Ben Dewhurst. <email redacted>

Further referneces brodcast in past six months 'The surgery' BBC advice show.

Alass no classics student. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.161.151.70 (talk) 06:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I have added a header to your question to differentiate it from the material above. I have also removed your email address. Replies to RefDesk questions are made here, not by email, and publication of your email address on a highly visible site like Misplaced Pages can leave you open to nuisance email from spammers.

This is the first and only edit made by your IP address, so your previous contributions may have been made while logged in under an account, or your IP address may be a dynamic one. From what I can gather, you have contributed what you term "controversial" material to several articles, which may have been removed by other editors. Contributions to Misplaced Pages are welcomed if they are verifiable and neutral, but please note that Misplaced Pages is not a primary source and does not publish original research. If your contributions relied on your own theories or ideas, unsupported by any reliable published sources, then they will probably have been removed for this reason. This applies to all editors, no matter what their background or academic expertise.

The best place to discuss potentially controversial changes to an article and seek consensus for them is on the talk page of that article. Regards, Karenjc 11:21, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Aha, I think I've found the edits in question: you were editing as 86.142.216.142. Your edits were indeed mainly to talk pages rather than articles, and that's the right place to suggest improvements if they are controversial. Or you can be bold and make the changes yourself, if you are sure they satisfy Misplaced Pages's editing policy. This is a page for questions about the humanities generally; I'm afraid the volunteers here have no more say than any other editor on what goes into individual articles. By the way, you can sign your comments (on talk pages, not in articles) by adding four tildes at the end of your comment, like this: ~~~~. This will produce a signature and datestamp that will help other users identify your contributions and communicate with you more easily. Regards, Karenjc 11:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

the political and spiritual persecution to me for Chinese and HK people

== TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

My name is Yu Kun Leung. I’m 33 years old Chinese woman, I’m single and never get marry. I had been suffering in the situation of the insult , frame up, slander, insult, discrimination and sexual harassment for eight years above. They’re my ex-bosses, managers, colleagues, ex-boyfriend and his daughter, even the leaders of china government. I can’t help complaining them, but there’s no china organization to help me. The only way to help myself is to issue the articles on line and set up the blog to expose them. But all the webmaster of website almost deleted my some articles and made excuse that I was advertising and the china government forbad me to issue. Since I issued the blogs and articles on line in 2008, hacker invaded my network to detect my browsing record and spread the virus to my computer. Here attached some evidence and photos for your reference. The most convincing evidence is my parents, ex-boyfriend and my body, u can find out the fact that my ex-boyfriend looks like a fool because he ate the drug what they dropped( pls see attached photo), I had a little drug which can speed up aging, destroy the brain, lead to cancer. However, I find out this truth they try to cover. That’s why they spread out the gossip that I’m fool and sick.U will find out what I said it’s truth via body check to see if our body is poisoned or not. Here are some websites are related to the human right organization I can’t browse in China: fidh.org,antislavery.org,hrw.org,amnesty.org,amnesty international etc.

I had benefit conflict with my ex-boyfriend’s (CHI HUNG LAU) daughter(Winnie Lau) who worked at Swiss bank in HongKong because her father-my ex-boyfriend gave me some money to buy house to settle down in GuangZhou China. My ex-boyfriend and his daughter contacted UK college I applied, even the leader of G.Z government go to UK embassy to say me in the purpose of ruining my reputation and prevent me from going out of china and their control in stead of going to call police and ask lawyer. Everybody here said Chairman Hu and Jiang said me (pls find the attached in Chinese) . Someone sent message to my mobile to ask me to transfer money to their account. Or not, I will die. They violated my human rights, exposed my privacy, ruin my life and reputation. It’s political and spirit of persecution.

Here below is my real story in detailed.

I had fallen in love with a HongKongee who is twenty years above old than me for three years. He was rich man in China but not in HK because he just had four houses in HK and Macau . He’s just middle class in HK. He not only my relative but also my boyfriend. We were introduced by another relative and became lovers. Since 2002, no matter I worked, open jewellery shop and made a living, they came up to interfere my life, ask folks to spread out the rumour and gossip to slander, insult and disdain me, make trouble and coincidence to convince people believe what they said about me in the purpose of pressuring on me for compromise. Therefore, he agree me not go to work and close shop and support my daily finance. Due to our gap between finance and age, his daughter objects extremely. She was used to say that I didn’t love him but just for his money. She was afraid of me to take away of his entire estate asset. He loves her very much and was used to send her to USA for study in millions, took care of her cat for 15 years day and night and did homework and cook for her at night after his busy time which he had to work from 4am to 6pm until she get married. Nowadays, she just gave one-tenth of her salary for him monthly. However, he won’t get away from me because of his daughter. Nobody had right to interfere our life because of our love.

From 2008 to 2009, I went to HK frequently. We went down the street to get attention from people who thought of our age is not match. Therefore, the neighbors who are fish and vegetable detailer yelling me that I was hooker and crazy woman etc. even the security guides of the building I lived said me that I was thieve and issued the notice to remind all residents to mind the thieves and change the door code. Also some women pointed to me and said I’m crazy and thieve for two years.

During couple time I went to temples for pray, the newspaper report thieve stole some Metal accessories from temples ( My blog showed these coincidences they made frequently to make people believe that me and my bf are guilty and suspicious) I’m not afraid their accusation because I’m innocent. However, no matter how I turn the other cheek to them in public and make friend with others, but they make trouble and spread out the rumour and gossip to misunderstand folks believe what they said about my bf and me. In order to make bad blood between my bf and me,they kept on persuading the friends, relatives and associates around my bf to destroy my reputation and credit. Also make illusion on my bf to believe that I had another man except him. I.e. a man hold his mobile to come up me and ask when I call him when we went out; a man ring our door at night but my bf didn’t open door through the door hole; sometimes, some call my mobile. I’m doubted that I didn’t show number to everybody except my parents and sister. Even I didn’t visit the rest of my relatives in HK. Obviously, they really want us to separate.

HK is very small place, if they want to make joke of me. They’re very easy to suffer me in slander, accursed, insult, discriminated situation. As far as we know, HK stars often are suffer in slander, accursed, insult, discriminated situation. Also the celebrities are under consensus and criticize and privacy discovery in newspaper. It’s proved that HK is a place where is more democratic than mainland China . HK people were used to live in rumors and gossips environment. They’re rather interested in benefit than true or fault discernment. I understood that they must offer overwhelming witnesses to prove that it’s my problem and I’m trouble maker in stead of them. They were good at making use of women,suckers and poor people to insult and slander me because that I had conflict with them in benefit and spend their money as they though. When I mentioned someone shouted at me and they must say I shouted at people firstly. General Speaking, everything I talked about is opposite as they were used to object my opinion in order to confuse and lie on folks. Pls be noted that I had a lot of unhappy experience, why I’m so stupid to mess up the relation between the folks and me? Why I’m so rude to screw up everything in order to make people angry by myself? Obviously, they’re intentional to torture and make trouble on me.

Folk can’t help asking why they had been keeping on tracing u? why there’re so many people to condemn me ? are u a trouble maker? I have to claim that I met the wrong people in the wrong time at the wrong place at first. Some of them are evils and revenge to me. For example, I was used to work at Kiu Lok estate management office, I was not satisfied with my female manager RACHEL LOK( the detailed I mentioned in another article) she’s afraid of me to destroy her reputation and complain her to the headquarter. It’s coincident that the company and she was left there. The second company MATTEL I worked where I met some male manager’s sexual indication and harass. I didn’t complain them but for the female clerk whom didn’t hand over job to me very successfully to G.M. They’re including my manager KF Lee, super-ordinate TINA and HongKong colleagues left after couple months I refused them and quit. Then I worked at E&E company where I met manager’s sexual implication again but I refuse and quit. He’s fired and the whole factory was sold by others after a year. Because of these coincidences and accidences occur, they were doubted and traced that if I was spider sent by other to investigate their companies and factories. Some said they hired me because I was hooker, the other said I was sent by the government because they had no idea why the custom and tax bureau checked them so often after I worked there. The colleagues from other department came to see me and intend to say I was not special as they said. From then on, I was in bad luck that the companies and factories were closed, some my ex-managers were laid off, it seems that some of them were in bad luck as well. Therefore, they said I was tornado (I was born the dragon of the year), where I came, where is disaster. They have been keeping eye on me and arrange me to the company or factory they controlled. Since 2002, they came up to persuade my friends, colleagues not to get close with me and said my fail work experience to let them down to me and transfer my ex-manager, super-ordinate’s messages on me that I was weird and lazy, look like thieve in the purpose of changing their good impression on me to bad and terrible side. They had been trying to prove that my character was problem, involved in gangster, and charged the fault on me. If they didn’t prevent me from making friend with my colleagues and strangers, I should get along with them very well. I was aware that they had been keeping eye on me and condemning me. I try my best to change my shortage, tolerate, respect and get on well with the colleagues and friends around me. However, they blew my top that I argue and fight with them to make them more hate to me. In fact, there was few people want to bring me into disrepute and give me a hard time (I knew who). They’re snaky to convince people that where I went, wherever I offend other. They egg people on arguing with me and make illusion and coincidence to prove that I was aggressive, querulous controversial woman and good at spreading out the rumours and gossips and spontaneous to fight and against others instead of the talebearer ruin everything I did behind me back and turn people against my bf and me. At the same time, they tired to make bad blood between people and my bf and me in profit conflict.

Who are they? They’re my ex-bosses and managers who lived in HK, also RACHEL LOK’s brother who is in charge of broadcasting department of police supervising centre.(Specially for the bosses from Kiu Lok estate management who made use of my first pension evidence to convince people around me and questioned my behaviour and working ability.) They were afraid of me to explain, complain and clear up. They drew my relatives, ex-classmates,ex-colleagues and friends over to their side in order to be alliance to criticize, correct my words and control me. They had some supporters who are interested party to help to spread out the rumours and gossips to effect on my life in order to get more and more people to believe that I’m evil, liar. They try their best to keep on sending the negative message to me: most of the HK people dislike me, I’m not popular woman, they didn’t welcome me. However, I’m continue to sure that HK is a harmony, stabilize, economic boom place where is more fair, justice and democrat than GZ and SZ city. Most of HK folk are kind, nice and educated and happy to help each other. But there was a little of saboteur went to every etiquette to step on my toes, they made use of my bf’s neighbours, friends, colleagues and relatives, even his daughter strategically to spread out the vicious gossip to traduce my bf and me so as to expand their power and influence and convince more and more people who pay attention on us. I felt it’s getting more and more serious and call the police station, he’s weird to say it’s just civil dispute instead of criminal. I’m doubted his explanation but he didn’t respond again. Why he said I had civil dispute but nobody to stand up to accuse us in police station? I think they absolutely destroy the good impression of HK. If you had comment on me, leave message to me instead of saying us behind our back. Or not u’re backbiter, abused, framed us.

Some suspicious issues for your analysis and study:

1) They said I’m thief. Why they inform everyone after I left each time? ( Note: my first and second jobs didn’t happen similar accusation, but for the third company which named Kiu Lok estate management office because they brought first pension for me. Rachel and her bosses extremely complained and accused me) i.e. when I quit the job or went to travel with my bf, went shopping, they were unctuous to remind the outsiders including the bosses, managers, tourists,tourist guide and merchandiser to watch out us because they doubted us as thieves for seven years. Also they said we are disreputable. I was used to go body check in S.Z hospital, there were four women in room, two women came after me, female doctor. She dare at me to say to her accompanist: “be care of a thief.” I went to travel with my bf during 2006-2009, the accompanied G.Z tourists are sneak up to said to others: “we look like thieves, we should be aware of our luggage ” but they didn’t call police to look up our luggage and belongings. They’re sarcastic explained that we’re just pilferers not serious criminal. It’s big insult and mischievous! I didn’t pilfer since I was child. My teachers and classmates are my personal dignity witnesses.(My record in Campus showed my dignity) As far as they said me and kept eye on me, why not to expose at that time face to face because I have been traveling in HK for two years? Why talked about us behind our back instead of face to face directly? Why they just mentioned we are thieves to others time by time instead of call police to investigate us directly? Why I had been in HK for two years, police never ask me and check my belongings? Let me lay bare an evil plot: they just want me not to go oversea, brought disrepute upon me and ruin my life. For the above reasons, I went to police station to issue non-criminal certification for myself.

2)They said the outsiders paid attention of me because of my weird behavior instead of someone spread out the rumors and gossips everywhere. For example, they intend to say I’m thieve to bring people’s concern, discuss. They exposed my private life, arouse public indignation and suspicion to pressure on me. They try to drive me crazy by venomous gossips. They always turned upside down the fact by their purely fiction and confound right and wrong. i.e. I have been reconciled to them and kept silent, never announce before the blog issue for seven years above. But they deny they did spread out my story before I clarify. They took advantage of folk to threaten me, pressure me to surrender. I don’t believe the people want me to die unless they’re allied with them in benefit because I had no finance or life dispute with them. The rest of outsiders are followed by them and reluctant to get trouble. Even they spread out the rumor that the china leaders said me ( There are witnesses admitted that rumor). I don’t’ believe the china leaders say sth to influent on my life and future and make me live harder in china. Besides, I didn’t meet them before and offend them except RACHEL's brother, why they just condemn and criticize me only as I’m innocent woman? I’m enjoy the favorable policy in china including housing mortgagee, pension and medical insurance. Obviously, they want me to live in poor condition lonely in china, put me into the situation that I have no chance to find my leg in the society and everybody can’t trust and help me.

3)They said I’m hooker because of the male ex-managers and colleagues were eager to have sex with me but failed. They did sexual harass on me. They were initiative to insult and slander me as hooker because I asked them money but I swear I never ask them money and had sex with them. My JiangXi ex-bf also was allied with them to insure I was hooker because I was sales in foreign trade field and got in touch with foreign customers frequently. I did saw some female sales make use of their body to gain orders for factory and company. But I never did it before because I always stay a company or factory for couple months, even a working year I was used to refuse foreign customers once. Therefore, I was fired by some factories because I didn’t sacrifice by myself to them. Nowadays, I had no official record to show that I’m hooker except the rumour. I can’t help asking why not arrest me because it’s illegal to be hooker in china. They including RACHEL Lok’s brother who is in charge of broadcasting department of police supervision center just past on it to everybody, even G.Z police to believe that I’m prostitute. They intend to introduce women to my bf so as to compete with me now, but he didn’t abandon me. Hence, they must break my exclusive privilege, go on spreading out the rumors to hurt and kick me out of my bf’s life so that they can control my bf totally. May,09,china government issued new law concerning sexual abuse and harassment in order to protect and defend helpness women just like me eventually.

4)They said I’m liar. Because I totally depend on my bf in finance. He agrees that I didn’t come back to work. They’re really jealous me to wangle profit from my bf. They told people I sponged money from my bf . On the other hand, they have been on my case to make me fall into disrepute due to separate us. Here are questions: if I’m disreputable in people’s heart, how I can lie on them? Why not to put me in jail ASAP? Why just talk behind my back to people? I’m just small, weak and ordinary citizen, nobody stand up to accuse me on what kind of sin I get to him face to face. They just pitched a yarn to back-bite my bf and me.

5)They said I’m evil woman and involved in gangster. But why the police didn’t contact me to inquire and arrest me? Nowadays, they said I’m changed but try to make false phenomenon and coincidence to prove that I’m evil.I was used to work at company or factory where I kept in touch with bosses,managers and colleges or clients who were the suspect gang as they mentioned. Are they contradicted? I’m always cautious to make friends and knew that birds of a feather flock together. They not only insult me but also insult all friends,bosses,managers,colleges and clients I knew. I never betray my bf although they always slander me that I had two men at the same time. They’re cursed me not to marry with a good man even never marry.It's odd that I can't contact all colleges and friends almostly who were witnesses to prove that someone did slander and frame me via mobile because the number is not exist anymore.It's obvious that someone prevent them from contacting me in order to misunderstand between us.

They want to control my bf, but failed and announced the public that she’s miserable and innocent and misapprehend people to believe that I stole her bf. As the matter of fact, the most convincible evidence is that my bf recognized me as an only girlfriend whom accompanied with him to travel in holiday. Why they always sully my reputation time by time? Obviously, they hope to raise her price and devalue me for their benefit sake. Not only ask her to have sex with my bf to drive him to fall into disrepute of playboy, but also arouse folk to condemn him as heathen. Nowadays, she’s pregnant but the baby is not belong to my bf, they spread out the rumor that my bf didn’t bear the responsibility to her and I’m evil to kick her out so as to call people angry and criticize. General Speaking, they try to intend to stirred up trouble and hatred that they must be right in everything; most of people must be on their side. In this effect, it became more and more people get to know our story and misconceive of us. Man is multiple-choice animal. If woman is initiative to knock his door, he must not refuse. I didn’t interfere them, but they reluctant to accept me and want me to get away from him forever.

6)When I get on well with new friends, they ask my friends to contact them in advance, make them believe that I was sick. They had drawn my relatives, friends, ex-colleagues and classmates over to their side to provide tons of witnesses and false evidences to convince them in order to make bad blood between my new friend and me. For example, my aunt told my rest of relatives that I was sick ( I had mobile message evidence) and then her reward is that her husband was promoted and had a rise in wage in 2006. For the sake of profit, they make all people around me to trust that I was sick successfully. If u don’t believe, u can make friend with me, there must be tons of folks come up to talk about my story to u. But I’m afraid u will deny this fact because of their power and influence and u might be their side or turn coat after I revealed them. Here are the questions: Although they have been talking about me as a psychopath for 7 years, why they’re worry about me to say? Why they’re nervous to explain and correct my words time by time? Are they contradicted? I’m fully confidence that some people are justice, fair and conscientious who recognize that they did hear from the tale slanders before I mentioned and make them blood run cold. They just want me to be alone to live without helping from friends.

7)Nowadays, they can’t keep their fingers crossed so as to say I’m a undercover for the sake of kicking me out of company or wherever I went, they pushed me to leave. Regardless of business or politic spy, I’m impossible to engage in their supervision and concern virtually. I was born in G.Z. Welcome everyone to supervise and investigate to me. I hope you can give me back the fair and justice result consequently. What they’re contradicted that they announced to public that I’m depression, obsessive-compulsive disorders and persecution paranoia etc. I was used to come to see doctor in 2001 who described me to some anti-depression pills. But I stopped eating after two years. They broadcasted a practical joke and rumors intentionally everywhere but failed to drive me crazy because I’m sang-froid and protect myself. Therefore, they made the utmost of people’s obsession and the china government to to bring me down and convince more and more folk for their power and influence sake. Here is the question that is there anyone who pay the insane to be spy?

8)I showed all up at present, they said I had twin sister, she did knew gangster and evil thing. Facts are stronger than rhetoric. I had a younger sister who doesn’t look like me and was married. Both of us are good and reconciled children since we born.

9)Because they always cursed me that I was sick and useless. I went to hospital for body check once a year. I had several medical record of hospital to show that I’m sound. It’s suspected that they appointed someone to drop drug which can damage my nerve and brain and degrade my IQ. Otherwise, why they’re so eager to hope me to get to sick? The only explanation that they’re venomous evidently. I can prove there’re two companies were involved in RACHEL LOK’s family, one is her relative, the other is her brother’s friend who want to control me and drop drug to my drink and food for the sake of damaging my brain. As the result, I was defiant and against them and left their companies. Nowadays, they accused both my bf and me are psychopath in order that we’re under the discrimination, oppression and isolation situation in society. Both my bf’s and my family had no hereditary psychopath. Everyone is out of control in emotion, temper and depressed, is everyone psychopath? Both my bf and me never disturb public order and effect on people’s life, but they kept on creating confusion of our life via consensus and power. They spread out our story to folk steadily, is their behaviour a usual way?

10)At this moment, they had no excuse to scarify me but for my character and the way to survive in this society. They said I’m egocentric, feisty,over-defend and over-doubted woman. People dislike this kind of woman just like me. In fact, I knew it’s crucial for team work spirit when I was student. Therefore, my teacher and classmate evaluated me as good and friendly person. I’d like to make friend but they’re ironic to say I lived by my wit. Since 2000, I have been criticized, evaluated, I gave my best shot on everything I did and get on well with everybody. Nevertheless, they’re hatred and angry about me for the sake that I didn’t yet have sex with them, against and disobey them, lose their face. Furthermore, I complained them everywhere and everybody now, they regard me as their antagonist eventually and made me blood run cold.

11)Due to their continue implication to my bf that they’re tremendous wealth, and power and overwhelming people were their control, or not, we must die. Therefore, we’re unable to fight and struggle with them. My bf was under pressure on denied what I said to support them because he’s under control of them. Therefore, they make use of him to clear “fact” in public that there was nobody said us, it’s just my illusion and sick. But some are justice, fair and conscientious to recognize and agree that they knew me before I issue the blog.

12)There’re great disparity in social status, rank，manpower and wealth between me, my bf and them. The rich and powerful people in HK and Mainland China support them in public; the officials also are on their side because of their trick, conspiracy and convincing ability. It’s indisputable to trust them and discriminate, obsess and suspect even maleficent and frame to us in order to arouse more and more people attention. Furthermore, I had no chance to get to know and in touch with celebrity of each industrial and official so as to be in minor status. However, I didn’t surrender and follow them because they can’t offer the life I need except the destroy, insult, slander and frame up.

To sum up all the facts since I issued the blogs and articles in every website for a year. I accepted many opinions and suggestions. I’m really appreciated all the people who are angle hearts and loved to help me out of the dilemma. I wish them all the best and smooth in their life. Meanwhile, I collected some conversation evidence between the bluffers, tale-bears, and me to show up the fact that they really spread out the rumors and gossips to public and some people were hearsay from them when I set up the blog in TAOBAO. Here is the link in Chinese Version to show that the truth.

Firstly, I think some were shammed to mislead the folk believe that I misunderstood the messengers. By the truth of that the normal way of outsiders would not reply what I said or showed sympathy for me. If some heard me from others or they recognized me from the photos I posted, they can’t help abusing me because they were afraid me to expose their plot and impair the prestige of them. In order to gloss over　their　mistake and conceal their true intentions, they were initiative to hurl abuse me and show the cloven hoof for threatening me. It’s evidence that they were acted in collusion with all I mentioned, blabbed out the secret or just flattered.

It’s clear to show that they didn’t click the link of article I left to try to figure out what happen on me and ticked me off at once. They saw my message about my article introduction and told me off ‘’ are u crazy? Sick? Insane? ‘’ all these words can be found in my articles although they didn’t read my article in advance. That means they knew my story and me in advance and didn’t need me to explain. Some explained that I quoted out of context to suit my purpose, but my question is that why they keep silent when I kept asking them and didn’t explain to me why they just abused me once they saw my article appeared and also they never make apologize to me. Yet, if they quibbled over that they input wrong words, get the wrong person instead of me, kid made wrong words in computer….It does make sense to show that they gave the shaft to public and they did heard me from others before I left the message to them. For instance, HKee wrote in complex form, they pretended to comment on my article that I should go to see psychological doctor because I was in a flat spin, why they accuse me just one item? It’s trick that they will impose on doctor or convince doctor to believe that I’m psychopath and issue the description to show public that I’m psychopathic. Therefore, nobody would trust me anymore, what I clarify the fact and truth is changed to fault, mistake and illusion. Besides, several HK web stations ban me after I issued the article on their web page for the reason that I issue the advertising there. (web:failforum.net;hkplants forum;hkcities.com)It’s obvious that I just describe my experience instead of product promotion. They allowed others to issue the article except me in the forum. Let’s review the following link of article, one of them said me it’s sense of inferiority, it seems that she must get along with me so that she can make this conclusion. Unless, she was just hearsay. Another said me that I’m pretend to be naive. Here’s the question that how she see through my article because I didn’t show my photo on it. Someone left message that women were so busy that they can’t say me. Is that suspicious to turn out that some intend to leave the malicious gossips to my article? How they only can judge me as psychopath via my articles except they met, hearsay or against me for benefit? The wise and smart can sure that some are pretend to leave message to throw their weight around and making people to bully and malign to me.

I believe that some try to object what I issued on line to the public behind my back, if it was, it would show the truth what I mentioned above automatically. Nowadays, they make use of my bf to prove I’m unusual because I locked all seasoning at home. But they covered the truth that they dropped drug which make us become a fool and psychopath person. Or not, why they always try to prove I’m insane? It’s simple to testify the above what I mentioned: as long as u contact and keep conversation to me, someone will come up to contact u or make use of the people around u to convince u. all the hearsay are the same as the articles I mentioned.

I had no chance to meet rich, influential and powerful people to explain and complain but they can. I had no right to find good chance to work and live because all people thought of me as thieve, hooker and psychopath in china. I just want to study oversea to seek any surviving hope for myself, but they try their best to prevent me from going out of china and threaten me to compromise now.

I did wish someone is hero to rescue me out of china. My only wish is that I won’t want to live in china anymore and I will be volunteer or refugee if anyone wants to hire me from Europe, Canada, Australia, News land because they’re real democracy and respect woman.

PS:All attached photos and files will be sent once u get me back. ==

• Misplaced Pages help forums
• Misplaced Pages resources for researchers