This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Elockid (talk | contribs) at 13:15, 4 July 2016 (rm. Banned user). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• 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

June 28

Weston, Newark, Nottinghamshire

What article should I read that would explain why so many place names in Britain have three components? Are these like county/municipality/neighbourhood? For example, we just say Woodbury, NJ or Hempstead, NY and not Woodbury, Gloucester, NJ or Hempstead, Nassau, NY (there are cases of overlap like Washington Township, NJ, of which I used to drive through two or three a day regularly--I think there are six in different counties in the state--but these are still only distinguished by postal code in most cases. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 04:50, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

It's the other way around; neighbourhood/village - town/city - county. Fgf10 (talk) 06:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Place names in this form are usually only used in postal addresses. The second name is the Post town, i.e. one of the main distribution centres for mail. According to Royal Mail it's not necessary to include the county name in an address. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 07:40, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

And giving more than one component is the exception not the rule in Britain, μηδείς. People would normally refer to that place as "Weston" to anybody familiar with the region, and as "Weston, near Newark" to anybody who wasn't. Even with places where there is ambiguity, we tend not to use a binomial name: if I needed to clarify, I would say "Richmond, in Yorkshire", in ordinary speech: only if I were giving an address, or dealing with a list of places, would I say "Richmond, Yorkshire" or "Richmond, North Yorkshire". --ColinFine (talk) 12:27, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Then I would say "where's Newark?", "where's Richmond?, (50/50) "where's ?". That is, if I knew it was British so it's not Newark, New Jersey, Newark, Delaware, or Richmond, Virginia. I couldn't find Nottinghamshire on a map. It's in the middle, right? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:38, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Note that our article has Weston, Nottinghamshire and makes no mention of Newark. If you were posting a letter, as Colin says above, it would be helpful to include the postal town, but if you have the postcode correct, then it will get there without. Alansplodge (talk) 13:59, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

If you enter a Weston postcode in the Royal Mail postcode finder, it does return an address in Weston, Newark. As you say, it will likely be properly delivered with just a house number and postcode, but it's not the proper postal address. The correct one will include the postal town of Newark. Old folk like me still add the county by habit, and it is part of the address but not needed in the postal address.--Phil Holmes (talk) 14:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

It's an ironic question, because most British people find the American system of using two names exotic. I'd never say that I come from "London, England". We can get away with using one name because there's such massive diversity in our place names and also because there's usually enough context that even if you live in one of the few places with a popular name, like Newport, your listener would often know that you meant Newport in Cornwall without the need for disambiguation. People from very small towns that assume that their correspondent hasn't heard of often opt to name their nearest large town, instead of the inconvenience of the two place name. It seems that the American convention is to name both place and state, even when they come from the vastly pre-eminent place with that name (I'll refer you back to the "London, England"). I've not met anyone from Oklahoma City. Would they say they come from "Oklahoma City, Oklahoma" in the same way I've often heard "Chicago, Illinois"? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 08:52, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

The analogy is not exact, because the states were in original conception sovereign entities, each with their own legislature, unlike the old counties of England, which do not have their own parliaments. Hence many names like Springfield are found in many states. (Australia has at least 6 Springfields, there are at least 40 in the US, and some states even have more than one!) Of course, if you are in the next town over from Springfield, Massachusetts, you will omit the state name in discussion. But the US is about 470 times the size of Wales, so some redundancy is to be expected. μηδείς (talk) 16:12, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. Mind you, some Welsh place names would go down a storm over the pond. Like this one: Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 16:40, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

@Dweller: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg, Massachusetts. Native American for " You fish on your side, I'll fish on my side, and nobody fishes in the middle". Used by some residents and the website of the town the lake is in despite being exaggerated/BS. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:09, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Excellent! I hope Amunugama Rajapakse Rajakaruna Abeykoon Panditha Wasalamudiyanse Ralahamilage Ranjith Krishantha Bandara Amunugama visits. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 07:13, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Homosexuality in Tudor England

Are there are any good reference works that give a history of homosexuality in Tudor England, particularly how it was conceptualised and what attitudes toward it were - I'm doing a research project on how Tudor England perceived the reign of Edward II, an allegedly gay monarch. Thus far, I've looked at Tudor Histories of England and how they describe him, I've started to look at Marlowe's Edward II, but I need more information on the historiography of homosexuality, and how it was perceived in that time frame. Thanks very much --Andrew 14:55, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Some refs and comments at Edward_II_of_England#Piers_Gaveston_and_sexuality, two more at History_of_homosexuality#The_Middle_Ages, also note the historiagraphy section for Edward II. This looks to be a well-curated bibliography. I can't tell how much this book talks about Tudor England, you might be able to skim it on google books. 17:10, 28 June 2016 (UTC) SemanticMantis (talk) 20:05, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

• Wow, thank you, there are some excellent resources there for me to have a look at, the Harvard book has an entire chapter on homosexuality in post-reformation England --|||| — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrandrewnohome (talk • contribs) 19:56, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Assassination attempt on Shirley Waldemar Baker

Can someone help me find an extremely detailed account (available online) of the assassination attempt on Shirley Waldemar Baker with reference to the presence of the Crown Prince of Tonga?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 17:48, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

All I can see if the autobiog of Sioeli Nau here which gives a brief overview of events with no real firm information. Nanonic (talk) 18:15, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Also - please do read the footnotes, they're quite interesting. Nanonic (talk) 18:18, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

@Nanoic: Can you link me to the footnotes? I am afraid the preview would end before I reach it.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 18:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

and should be good for you. Nanonic (talk) 19:08, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Ignotus

Can anybody find more information on a man named Ignotus, who was a traveling correspondent for The New Zealand Herald in 1886; one of his articles here?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 18:39, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Ignotus is Latin for "unknown". Was it common back then to use that for articles by anonymous authors, perhaps? --Or a specific individual journalist wishing to investigate incognito, such as a travel review columnist. --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:8909:BFA1:BA09:8D73 (talk) 18:55, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thanks!--KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

This might give a clue as to why he wished to remain anonymous. http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&d=NZH18861213.2.8.3 Wymspen (talk) 17:00, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

June 29

Electronics prices in Narita International Airport

I have a short layover at Narita International Airport and plan on doing some electronics shopping.

Being duty free might mean that goods there might be cheaper, but being in an airport could also mean a high marker which negates the duty free savings. Is there any way of checking the actual prices of goods sold in the airport online? That way I can compare them against Amazon to decide whether it's a good deal or not and thus know in advance how much Yen to exchange. Johnson&Johnson&Son (talk) 01:27, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Why do you need to exchange dollar to yen? Just use your VISA credit card, I seriously doubt that you will find a single shop in Narita airport that does not accept VISA credit card. 175.45.116.105 (talk) 04:37, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

There's the potential to have any savings that they would have benefited from being chewed up by exchange fees from Visa. Dismas| 16:32, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Credit card exchange fees are often better than anything mere mortals can hope to get from other small amount exchange methods. In fact, a common recommendation is to put a positive balance on your credit card (to avoid a cash advance fee) and get money that way rather than trying to exchange it anywhere. (Using your ATM card may or may not be the same, depending on the exchange rates offered and especially any fixed fees for international withdrawals. Also whether your bank does tag on any extra fees for cash withdrawals even with a positive balance as some do although at least they can't charge you their ridiculous interest rates, and how these compare. Using your credit card that way may carry additional risk if your bank doesn't offer the same protections surrounding misuse for a positive balance. I've also heard that in the US you may be sent a cheque for the positive balance, so need ensure you don't put it positive to far ahead.)

Anyway getting back to the main point about using your credit card directly, just check and make sure your bank doesn't just an excessive fee (should probably be 3% at most). Or worse some stupid fixed or minimum fee (although possibly not an issue given the price of electronic items you're likely to purchase duty-free anyway).

Note that electronic items often only have minimal, if any, duty . Venezuela and Argentina seem to be two definite exceptions. But in most places if you don't have to pay a VAT or sales tax where you live, the savings if any, probably aren't coming from being duty free but other factors like such items being cheaper in Japan. (Although probably not helped by it being an airport.)

Nil Einne (talk) 23:41, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. It should not be called Duty-free shop at all, it should be called Sales tax, VAT, and duty-free shop since most of the savings are from the lack of sales tax and VAT. I'll just go ahead and rename the Duty-free shop article since it's a complete misnomer.

Or perhaps when people say "duty free" they're just using it as a synecdoche for "sales tax, VAT, and duty-free" since most people aren't pedants and are not obsessed with their everyday speech being 100% technically correct. Johnson&Johnson&Son (talk) 09:34, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

My point was that duty-free shops are only worthwhile for electronics items if you are likely to be paying sales tax or VAT, everywhere else being equal. Although it may seem VATs are universal in the developed world, the US is a prominent country without a VAT. For some reason I thought you came from the US so thought it was particularly important, but guess I was wrong. However I did ensure my comment was universal precisely for this reason. Note that while there are state sales taxes in the US, they are often so low that their effect can be lost in noise when considering electronic items, especially given warranty hassles and exchange rates.

As also mentioned, this doesn't mean it isn't worth shopping for electronics in foreign countries. Some countries are known for having significantly cheaper electronics than others, e.g. Hong Kong vs NZ (even when you remove NZ's 15% GST). But in that case the savings don't come from being duty free and often if you have the choice it's better to shop outside duty free shops. (Depending on local laws and the shops practices, you can sometimes avoid having to pay VATs or sales taxes if you're tourist for items exported, perhaps as a refund.) But since it sounds like your only option would be from duty-free shops, you don't have a choice, again something I indicated in my first post. (Admitedly most places known for cheap electronics you don't have a choice in the other way, since prices at duty free shops aren't close to comparable.)

This compares to stuff like alcohol or tobacco which normally have significant duties so you will often get significant savings at duty free shops (even with their frequently high markups), regardless of whether you come from a country with a VAT or high sales tax or not. Depending on where you live, clothing, shoes and other such items can have intermediate duties, so they can be worthwhile shopping duty free, especially if there is a sales tax or VAT even if only a small one.

If you want to argue whether duty-free shops are a misnomer, I suggest you take that to somewhere else since it's besides the point of the RD and unrelated to what I said. Note that nowhere did I say anything about the name being a misnomer, my only comments were about whether you're likely to save money and why. I explicitly mentioned sales or VAT taxes along with local prices (and obviously exchange rates) as the likely deciding factors since these are what you'll likely need to consider if you can't find prices online (and it's not looking like you can) and understanding these means you can apply them to your specific conditions. If you already understood all this before my first post, I'm sorry if my first answer was useless to you, but from my experience, plenty of people do not. A simple "I already knew or that" or "you've wasted your and my time, I already knew all that" or "your answer was useless I knew all that" or whatever would convey that point without needing to bring up pedantry (which I am, but that issue wasn't an example of one).

Nil Einne (talk) 14:00, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't have a credit card. Johnson&Johnson&Son (talk) 06:20, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

In that case, it depends what the taxes are for where you live. If you are usually in Europe, where VAT is around 20%, a duty free shop can save you a bit, even if you pay 10% for getting the exact amount of Japanese yens. But if you are from a US state which has 6% sales tax, then you are unlikely to save anything, because most manual exchange transactions done by a manned desk are charging you above that level of tax just for the transaction. I could not find electronics prices online for the Narita shops --Lgriot (talk) 11:47, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

An interesting point is that Japan only has a consumption tax of 8%. This isn't super low but is fairly low. Considering the generally higher prices at duty free shops, this likely means at most you should expect perhaps 4% savings over everyday prices in Japan. (Probably actually none.) So if the prices you see at regular shops in Japan (and you can surely find some online e.g. , , , or perhaps for a simple comparison) are about the same or only a bit cheaper than what you'd pay locally, you can guess it's unlikely to be worth it. If you really want, you could take off the consumption tax completely (our article suggests some stores don't include it anyway) but I think it's unlikely you'll get prices that good (in fact as hinted I suspect you'll find prices are higher compared to non duty free shops in Japan) at a duty free shop in the airport. Nil Einne (talk) 13:49, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I did find which I think is one store at Narita Airport and it has some recent dates, although I admit I couldn't figure out if the prices were at the airport store or what. also has a small number of electronic items, it's fancy enough that I guess the prices are updated.

is evidentally a website for Audio Plaza but while it has prices, they look to me like they may be rather old. The fact that the root website is suspended isn't a good sign for the details being up to date. There also is or was an Audio Space but doesn't seem to be very helpful ignoring the fact if it were working, it'll probably be outdated too. Especially since "was" seems to be right . Again ignoring the probably old prices, none of the other ones I found on that site e.g. seem to include electronics.

P.S. Depending on the length of your stopover, you also need to consider whether you can get to these stores. Some stores will only be in some terminals, so you'll need to move between them if not currently planning to. Worse, some may be before security which means you'll have to clear customs and immigration and then security and any immigration check to get back to your flight. If you are planning to do that, there's the question of whether you have enough time to visit a nearby store outside the airport.

Nil Einne (talk) 15:07, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Movement of Adolphe Féder

I've been working to write and improve the quality of the article on Adolphe Féder for some time now but the question I can't seem to answer is: what art movement can Féder be classified as? He was obviously a member of the École de Paris, but alas this is not an art movement, just a collection of artists that frequented the same cafés. As I am not well versed enough in the classifications of art, I've found the task very difficult but perhaps it can be accomplished by someone here. Thank you! Cawhee 07:56, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

After the mid-1920s there are no longer really any clearly defined movements in art. See the article on Neo-Fauvism which is supposedly the last coherent movement. He is himself, and his work defines itself, rather than having to be tied into any particular movement. Wymspen (talk) 10:13, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

FWIW: The de:WP says Fauvism. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 10:36, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

His early links with Matisse indicate that he had some links to the Fauvist movement - but most of his significant works date from a much later period, and have little in common with Fauvism as a coherent style. Wymspen (talk) 11:36, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Human Civilization

What country in Africa did the first humans come from? 2001:569:766D:AB00:E873:900E:29D7:FB8C (talk) 17:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Early human migrations#Within Africa says

The most recent common ancestor shared by all living human beings, dubbed Mitochondrial Eve, probably lived roughly 120–150 millennia ago, the time of Homo sapiens idaltu, probably in East Africa.....The broad study of African genetic diversity headed by Dr. Sarah Tishkoff... located the origin of modern human migration in south-western Africa, near the coastal border of Namibia and Angola.

Loraof (talk) 17:59, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

this has nothing to do with civilization. the first humans were not yet behaviorally modern. and even behaviorally modern humans lived as hunter-gatherers for like 40000 years afterwards Asmrulz (talk) 23:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

The title doesn't really fit the question. That happens from time to time. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 23:57, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

The extent of humanity's indebtedness to Africa is a contentious issue. Asmrulz (talk) 00:45, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

No Africa, no humans. Seems important enough. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:54, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, the only contention is the extent to which the main wave of humans leaving Africa mixed with the descendants of previous waves out of Africa. Iapetus (talk) 10:44, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

It's going to depend on what species you define as the first "human", but a case could be made for Olduvai Gorge and/or Laetoli, both in Tanzania. StuRat (talk) 16:58, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

June 30

Which state in the US has the most guns?

Johnson&Johnson&Son (talk) 02:39, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

It depends on how you measure it. You could Google the subject and zero in on what you're looking for. Also, I think was discussed on the ref desk sometime within the last year. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I guess I would measure it by the number of military guns + number of police guns + number of civilian guns. Johnson&Johnson&Son (talk) 06:19, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

And how are you going to get those numbers? Sir Joseph 15:38, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

In respect of the highest rate of per capita private gun ownership, the top three were Wyoming, Alaska and Montana. see Gun Ownership Statistics by State. Alansplodge (talk) 16:23, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

And it's most likely not correct. You can only count the guns in a state when you know how many guns are in the state. Pennsylvania for example has one of the highest rates of firearm licenses, but 1) a license is not required to own a gun and 2)there is no gun registry. Assuming you can somehow track via sales, many long guns are not sold through a dealer and I'm not sure the ATF would give out statistics on background checks. Sir Joseph 16:27, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

So the best you could do would be to show a minimum quantity of guns. Note also that the three highest per capita states are also sparsely populated. I would think a state like Texas would have a lot more guns overall. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 16:34, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Which is why I saw numbers far different than that survey. Not sure where I saw it, but it had TX/FL/PA as the top three, but that could also be number of licenses which might not be good to use for gun ownership since many people use different licenses depending on the carry laws. From the PSP, http://www.psp.pa.gov/firearms-information/Firearms%20Annual%20report/Pennsylvania_State_Police_2014_Firearms_Annual_Report.pdf, we see there were 670K transfers, but that doesn't mean ownership, and 219K licenses issued in 2014, I think it's safe to assume 90%+ of those 219K have at least one firearm. Interestingly, there is a section on crimes committed and the number of homicides is low, and then homicides with a firearm is even lower. Once you take out emotion and look at numbers, it's pretty eyeopening. Sir Joseph 16:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

User:Sir Joseph: "You can only count the guns in a state when you know how many guns are in the state" - can you explain that? If you already know the number of guns in a state, why would you need to count them? -- Jack of Oz 22:22, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

It would seem that the point is that you can't know the number of guns in a state. You can only make semi-educated guesses, through various types of surveys and counts of legal documents. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 23:25, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

And legal documents would not account for illegally obtained firearms. I am sure that States like New York and California are undercounted significantly in gun ownership statistics. They have larger cities... and the larger the overall population, the greater the sub-population of people who are criminals... i.e. people who are likely to have non-registered, illegally obtained fire arms. Blueboar (talk) 01:31, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

White history month?

Graphs for a pointing system?

My mech project is proposing a new algorithm for focusing a iact telescope.I am getting movement in each mirror as the output of actuator.I want to plot some graphs which could show effectiveness of my algorithm.but my actuator is having accuracy of 10 microns.please help me what all graphs I can plot? Sd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.206.113.75 (talk) 15:25, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

This is the wrong Desk. You could try the Computer, Science, or Math Desks. Also, you mentioned just one actuator for each IACT mirror. Wouldn't you need two, one to rotate it in one direction and another to rotate it in a direction perpendicular to that ? (I don't see any need for a third actuator to rotate the mirror in it's own plane.) And what type of graph are you looking for, an optics diagram showing how closely a given object is reflected towards the target point ? I'm not sure if 10 microns is a small enough increment to be useful. As far as focus, I believe in astronomy you just focus as if everything is infinitely far away (with possible exceptions for very close objects, like objects in low Earth orbit, and large telescope arrays) . StuRat (talk) 17:06, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

The OP may explore the response of their IACT (Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescope) control algorithm by means of a computer simulation. The simulation might include:

• The air shower caused by a random gamma ray entering the atmosphere.
• A model of the response of detectors to flashes of Cherenkov radiation.
• The algorithm that controls the mirror actuators.
• A log of the focus speed and accuracy obtained, reported e.g. using Excel graphs.

The goal is to quantify the energy detection gain over a single telescope for a source at infinity of the IACT array that actively compensates for atmospheric distortion. AllBestFaith (talk) 18:21, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Antiracism codeword for antiwhite

Stephen Crabb and Sajid Javid

I know that Stephen Crabb is standing in the Conservative Party leadership election, and yesterday, the news was saying that he'd be standing with Sajid Javid as his "number two", but I can't work out if Crabb is still running for leadership with Javid? This BBC News article says nothing about Javid, but this local news article says they're standing together. Could anyone help me please? Thank you!  Seagull123  Φ  19:32, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Javid was one of Crabb's two nominees, so yes, there's still an axis of agreement between them, of some sorts. The election is for a single post, so Crabb's arrangement is extra to that, which is I think why stories concentrate on him and ignore his side-kick. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:36, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense, thank you Tagishsimon! That makes more sense than the current news sources!  Seagull123  Φ  20:19, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I was looking for some more illumination from the BBC; although there wasn't much about his political relationship with Sajid Javid, they did say: "Mr Crabb, the first Conservative cabinet minister for a century to have a beard". That's all we needed to know... Alansplodge (talk) 21:09, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I think the relationship is the normal temporary opportunistic symbiosis of two ambitious men. Both are newbie cabinet ministers, Crabb since July '14 and Javid since April '14; presumably the 'joint ticket' is in some way proffered as the sum of their individual experience, where an ambitious singleton with a thin CV would not be at all credible. I read variously that Javid will be Crabb's No. 2 (which I take to mean Deputy Prime Minister) and/or that Javid will become Chancellor of the Exchequer, the de facto No.2 post. And whilst the odds for them in this contest are very long, I suspect the pair are mainly increasing their name recognition & hence stature for their future benefit. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:50, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Brexit and Corporation Tax

Now that Brexit will happen, will this mean that companies registered in the EU for tax purposes, such as Amazon, registered in Luxembourg, and Facebook, registered in Ireland, will, after the United Kingdom has withdrawn, have to register themselves in the UK for tax purposes. If so, presumably this will lead to increased corporation tax revenues, and will help to ease pressure on the economy? --Jblowe96 (talk) 20:49, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

No, that doesn't follow. Individual countries, including EU countries, have bilateral tax treaties with other nations to avoid double-taxation, the effects of which are that if a double-taxation treaty is in place and tax is paid in, for instance, Luxembourg, tax is not also paid in the UK. Arguably Britain post-Brexit (or rather, post single market, if it ever comes to that) may have more scope to alter its handling of its tax regime without falling foul of single-market regulations, but it will be wary that additional taxes imposed in the UK on companies operating from elsewhere will be matched elsewhere by additional tax on UK companies. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:00, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

• I'm still unclear how amazon.co.uk would be able to process its transactions through a company registered as 'Amazon EU SARL' if the United Kingdom was no longer a member of the European Union. Surely they should register themselves for tax purposes as 'amazon.co.uk' and register it in the UK. If there is something I'm not understanding, could you please explain, thanks --Jblowe96 (talk) 01:36, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Well we have no idea how the final UK-EU relationship is going to be. We also don't know what UK law is going be like. But it's fairly unlikely foreign companies are going to be forbidden to sell to the UK, this will be a serious dampener on internet commerce which UK consumers are unlikely to tolerate. And having a .co.uk website has never meant the company isn't foreign, even now it could be outside the EU e.g. based in China. It's possible that foreign companies won't be able to collect VAT (so it will need to be done at the border and charged to the customer) or operate local distributors meaning that an amazon.co.uk is unlikely to be really successful. More likely companies will still be able to use complicated structures to amongst other things try and minimise tax, just as they currently do in many countries both inside and outside the EU. Especially since even many diehard Brexiters want to be part of the single market, it's just the free movement of people that they don't want. (Funnily enough, their reluctance to accept what many consider a fundamental part of the free market may mean they fail to get it, so some help in this area.) There's currently a move against such structures worldwide anyway, and perhaps as Tagihsimon said, the UK being outside the EU will help them in their move against such structures. But there's so many unknowns in different areas (including as said unrelated to Brexit) that it's difficult to know what the effect of the UK being outside the EU is going to be. Nil Einne (talk) 05:52, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Has some pre-vote discussion . Note that both that and and to some extent all talk about one key point namely that the UK could try and compete with other places via offering low taxes less hindered by EU rules. They aren't talking about Brexit forcing companies to relocate to the UK to do business there. Other stories talk about other complexities e.g. . It may be worth reading how exactly Amazon etc operate at the moment since I'm not sure you understand (this isn't a dig, I think many of us don't either). P.S. And perhaps I didn't make clear enough but it's worth remembering even if a company has to have some sort of UK business to collect VAT, it doesn't mean they have to make their "profits" there, as we've seen with stuff like Starbucks etc. Nil Einne (talk) 08:03, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

July 1

Borders of the United States between 1781 and 1784?

The Treaty of Paris (1783) established the western border of the United States as the Mississippi River. However, I'm wondering: Was this what the states claimed during the whole revolution, or did it just come out in the final peace process? That is to say, if I were to make a map of the country after 1781 (when the Articles of Confederation came into force) but before 1784 (when the treaty came into force), would it only extend to the Proclamation Line of 1763? Or would the nascent country have claimed everything west as well? --Golbez (talk) 03:00, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

"Territorial evolution of the United States" might be helpful.—Wavelength (talk) 03:13, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I wrote that article, hence why I'm asking, for the rewrite of it. :) --Golbez (talk) 04:05, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

I have to say that I prefer the old maps, but perhaps this is for the article talk page. Tevildo (talk) 09:28, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

See Illinois campaign (1778-9) where the British were "run out" and the French Canadian residents swore oaths of loyalty and became citizens of Virgina (Illinois Country, and Illinois County, Virginia) Rmhermen (talk) 06:32, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

How factually accurate is the lede of the wikipedia Assault Rifle article?

The Assault rifle article strangely has an intro that sounds like the common sort of obsessive myth of the ww2/hitler genesis story of the STG-44. Were any assault rifles used before ww2? How slow was the adoption of the AR by various nations such as germany, the US, and european militaries? Were ARs developed first by germany? Was the role of the STG-44 as significant as the article portrays it to have been, detailing it's history and folklore about the stg-44? The article talks about how the definition of the AR is a "strict" one, and that it is very specific and the article insists that there is universal agreement over what rifles are ARs and what aren't going so far as to listing several comparing them to the "strict definition" put forth by the article. I find this very strange. Is there really such a strong consensus to the exact definition of an assault rifle going so far as to prescribe the exact minimum range a rifle has to accurately hit mansized targets at? Is there really such a strong consensus as to which rifles are and aren't assault rifles, and which assault rifle was the first assault rifle? What about the federof avtomat? The winchester model 1907? The assault rifle article calls out the stg-44 as pioneering the "straight stock and pistol grip". What of the Winchester Model 1917 that has the same features? What of the furrer m1920 with it's 7.65x35mm intermediate rifle cartridge? I'm asking this here because I don't have a lot of access to reliable sources on the topic, and the article cites several books that I don't have access to which make up the bulk of the reliable sources cited for the claims the article is making. How much of this story comes from the greater mythos of world war 2? Is the consensus of the experts in the field really as strong as the article makes it seem? If the intermediate rifle cartridge is so central to the genesis of the AR, why does the article have no information about, for instance, the 7.65x35mm, and it's history, and instead has this banner waving nazi wunderwaffen tale? I'd really appreciate if someone could round up a good reliable source or two that I can read. Thanks.TeeTylerToe (talk) 05:13, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

The article already cites ten reliable sources. Abebooks and Amazon probably have them. You could also try searching for them on Google books. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:39, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Following that advice leads to "The World's Assault Rifles and Automatic Carbines" Daniel D. Musgrave, Thomas B. Nelson T. B. N. Enterprises, 1967 546 pages "in world war II, germany also put an assault rifle into action. The principal feature which distinguishes the assault rifle from the semi-" but I'm only getting bits of three pages, and I don't have access to it. There's also "The German Assault Rifle: 1935-1945" 9781581606720 which seems to tell a different story, covering the Mk 42, judging by the table of contents. It looks like the Mk 42 automatic carbine was an open tender served by Haenel, Walther, and Vollmer each submitting a design, and here's something out of left field. The Stg 44? It's derived quite directly from the Haenel / Schmeiiser MKb.42(H). It doesn't look like the stg 44 was the first anything. And I'm starting to question this whole story about some hidden project to develop the stg 44 behind hitler's back as a supposed machine pistol, when, it seems, in fact, the stg 44 is derived from this machine karbine 42 project. This is throwing a lot of doubt on those 10 reliable sources you mentioned that are mostly books that I don't have access to. I don't suppose someone at the reference desk would have access to either of these books or would be in a position to research this topic a little? And thanks for the fruitful advice. Imagine my surprise when I found out that the stg 44 wasn't even the first german assault rifle. OK, google books has a preview of "Rifles: An Illustrated History of Their Impact

By David Westwood" In germany at least there's the Vollmer M35 in 1935 followed by the haenel, designed in 1940 and produced in 1941. "german interest in an intermediate cartridge first expressed itself in the 1930s... the design was a fact by 1940" It looks like russian employment of SMGs may have played a factor. "realized infantry action took place within 400 yards... automatic fire... forced him to keep his head down... making the approach and assault much easier... added to the fact that the russians were opting for cheap stamped machine pistols" The mauser g41 had been too heavy. Apparently walther submitted their first intermediate cartridge machine carbine model in 1937 two years after the vollmer.TeeTylerToe (talk) 07:40, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Your own intro could serve as the manual's illustration for the emotional impact of any combination featuring the two words "Adolf" and "Hitler" ( you are not wrong however that the part they are quoted might be otherwise rewritten). Note that the Haenel is the Stg44.. there is the fact that the Germans held combined military manoeuvers with the Russians in the 30's but the sources do not suggest that the 400 meters theory derives from this period. Then the adequacy of the Stg44 would be more or less coincidental, and the theory itself the result of experience. The importance of Hitler in the genesis could still yet however be attributed to the legends of an other time, when submachine-guns where considered remaining an ugly apanage of the gangsters, although yet war had to be done . --Askedonty (talk) 12:01, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

The stg was developed from the haenel with modifications, but it does seem common to conflate the two. And even in just germany the haenel was proceeded by the walther machine caribine, and that was proceeded by the vollmer.TeeTylerToe (talk) 19:39, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Looking after it I found the interesting story of the 1917 Winchester Machine Rifle as it's considered a possible predecessor, but it's also, say an industrial dead-end. It can be concluded that not everything which is technically possible will necessarily find its reason to materialize, or to be continued, like in this precise case. If all kinds of predecessors may deserve to be mentioned, that's if they are reasonably related, and the fact that they are sharing a technical aspect (eg intermediate caliber, some capacities) will not always relate them regarding the end they were conceived for. --Askedonty (talk) 23:59, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Then more recently and for a very long time an assault rifle was commonly either an AK-47 or clone, otherwise an M16 or clone. With such a limited set of branches, the genealogy must not be so diverse as that of all the automatic rifles. There is a prehistoristic stage certainly, but we need to stand on firm ground. Would it lead to anything else but to a discussion about trench intended assault-rifles anyway ?--Askedonty (talk) 16:50, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

There was the winchester 1907 before that. "The research led to an article published in the NRA Journal for the American Arms Collector, Man at Arms, (Vol. 13, No. 1, January/February 1991), titled The Burton Balloon Buster by William B. Edwards. Mr. Edwards emphatically asserted that this was indeed the first true assault rifle; developed in 1917. The father of this remarkable weapon was none other than Frank B. Burton, the noted engineer who worked with John Browning on the first BAR." did leap out at me. Addressing possible revamped versions of the article, I would support the article having something along the lines of "The origin of the name "assault rifle" and the first wide-scale use of assault rifles coincided when the StG-44 was adopted by the German Army in World War 2. But the article in it's current incarnation is wrong to state that the consensus is that the stg-44 was the first rifle with the qualities that define an assault rifle. The deadend, to me, seems to be the narrative of the article that the genesis of the assault rifle was it's development in nazi germany as one of hitler's wunderwaffen. It seems to be a false narrative. Is there a source says that the AK-47's over barrel gas tube was derived from the StG-44? Also, while the AK and AR are certainly the main branches, they certainly aren't the only families of assault rifles, no matter how dominant they are.TeeTylerToe (talk) 01:35, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

The article is full of reliable sources. TeeTylerToe simply refuses to acknowledge them and wants to fundamentally rewrite the article to match his point-of-view. Please, read TeeTylerToes comments on the Assault Rifle Talk Page.

I believe TeeTylerToe is a troll. His talk page edits follow the profile. He asks question for which the answers are obvious. He asks multiple often repetitive questions. He refuses to listen to the answers. He demands to know who decides which answers are correct, then repeats the questions. He provides nonsense examples and long draw-out often rambling comments, including 10 or more questions. He has done this not only on the Assault rifle talk page but every talk page that he edits.

And as Bilcat pointed out he did the same thing with his June 29 comments at Talk:Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II#Why are editors inserting an OR narrative that the A-10 design was a revolutionary tabula rasa design?--RAF910 (talk) 14:28, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

• A Brief History of the Assault Rifle, recently published The Atlantic article, may or may not help. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:38, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2

Witch-burning site in Poland

A couple of years ago I remember seeing a flat ground inscription in the Warsaw Old Town, approximately here in Podwale which said in Polish that in the Middle Ages on this site witches have been burned (in Polish, citing by memory: "w tym miejscu w średniowieczu palono czarownic"). Later I walked across Podwale, but saw nothing, possibly because of parked cars that frequently obscure the sidewalk (and on Google Maps the sidewalk is also crammed by cars). When I asked in the local tourist info spot, they said there's no such thing in Warsaw. Maybe I'm confusing this with another Polish city, but almost certainly it was Warsaw, less likely Toruń. Any ideas? Brandmeister 11:24, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

There seems to be a logical error with the tourism official stating that there is no such site in Warsaw. Do they claim to know everything that ever happened in Warsaw, from the Middle Ages on ? If it's so minor an event to modern Warsaw citizens that it only merits a plaque, which people then park on top of, it may very well drop "below the RADAR" of tourism officials. The tourism official should have said "none that I am aware of". I've had a similar problem with store clerks saying "we've never carried that item", when they really mean "we haven't carried it in the two years I've worked here", and they have no idea if they carried it before then. StuRat (talk) 15:22, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, and I'm afraid it was either removed or got buried under the parked cars. If only I could take a photo... Brandmeister 20:52, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

July 3

Secession vs Declaring independence

Is there any substantive difference in the terms "seceded" and "declared independence?" --Golbez (talk) 04:34, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

It'd be interesting to see if there's a correlation between independence and success. But to answer your question, take a look at the language used in wikisource:Category:Declarations of Independence. →Σσς. (Sigma) 05:35, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

In my view, "seceded" is rather negatively charged, unlike "declared independence" which implies some sort of legitimacy. Also, "declared independence" implies some previous aspiration and struggle for independence. The CSA, for instance, seceded from the US, not "declared independence"~, while the US declared independence from the British Empire, not seceded from it (like many other modern countries akin to Croatia or East Timor). Brandmeister 08:52, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

I think the difference is that secession is only possible if the entity seceding is an integral part of a larger entity. For example, Western Australia could (and almost did in 1933) secede from Australia. It can't declare independence from Australia because it is not dependent on her; that's because it is an integral part of her. The pips of an orange cannot declare independence from the orange, but they can secede. OTOH, a colony can declare independence from the mother country, because it is by definition dependent on her; but it cannot secede, because it is not an integral part of her. Not for all purposes, anyway. Puerto Rico is a territory of the USA; its people are treated like other Americans for some purposes, but not all purposes. It can declare independence. The people of Texas, otoh, are Americans for all purposes, by right, and they can secede. -- Jack of Oz 09:10, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

But on the other hand, Texas didn't secede from Mexico - it declared independence from it. And some CSA secession declarations actually specify they were declarations of independence. I would agree that you can't secede from a colonizing power, but that doesn't mean you can't declare independence from a nation you're part of. --Golbez (talk) 07:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Missing chunks of city

Searching "Vancouver, WA" got me this map, which contains a missing chunk highlighted by the green circle. If that chunk isn't part of the city, does it mean it belong to a higher entity i.e. the county, state or the federal government? Or is this simply a mapping error? Crudiv1 (talk) 11:26, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Just a normal effect of municipal annexation. The city's original boundaries were farther to the southeast (around downtown), and they gradually annexed territory farther northwest, but for whatever reason they decided not to annex the chunk highlighted by the green circle. This spot is part of the county, but because Vancouver isn't an independent city, the city is part of the county as well; this chunk is merely unincorporated. Nyttend (talk) 13:55, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Specifically, the map on page 3 of this PDF shows that the area surrouding the "missing chunk" was annexed sometime from 1991 to 2000 inclusive. But the document is mainly about possible new annexations and does not talk about the details of past annexations. If you look at aerial views of the city, e.g. by clicking "Earth" in Google Maps, you'll see that the "missing chunk" seems to correspond to some sort of industrial facility with a loop of railroad tracks around it, but it's hard to tell what it is and it's certainly not obvious what distinguishes it from the surrounding land that was annexed. --69.159.60.163 (talk) 04:52, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Such things aren't uncommon. See the map of Los Angeles's boundaries for a much crazier map. As a So Cal resident I can tell you that a lot of people who live here don't understand very well where exactly they live. It's common to just say "I'm from LA" if you're from anywhere in the Greater Los Angeles Area. --71.110.8.102 (talk) 06:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Moderator of the proto-General Assembly of the Church of Scotland

Not having access to the 1908 edition of the Church of Scotland Yearbook (I'm not finding it with Google), and not knowing where else to look, I come here. List of Moderators of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, with its early centuries based heavily on the 1908 edition, claims that both John Row and Patrick Adamson were moderators of the April 1567 meeting of the Assembly. Obviously you can't have two people in the chair at the same time (it's the presiding officer of the meeting, the equivalent of the Speaker), so the situation is rather confusing. Did one replace the other partway through, or was there conflict over which one was lawfully the moderator (like the Old Court – New Court controversy centuries later in a different context), or is there simply a mistake here? Nyttend (talk) 13:49, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

The proceedings of the meeting are available online, here, and indicate that Row was the moderator in April 1576. Warofdreams talk 15:41, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Removed Adamson; thanks for the help! Nyttend (talk) 15:51, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Trying to find a romance book

My wife reads romances. In 2011 she read a book after she downloaded it in Kindle. We have a joint Amazon account and since then I've downloaded many books on it too. Now she cannot find it presuming somehow the book has been deleted. She does not remember the author's name or the title, only some characters and the plot. This is what she recalls:

I remember in the book I'm looking for, 3 mayor characters: a nobleman/scientist Edmond/Edmund/Edward (?), his 17 year old niece (Jane?), a very strong character; David, an 18 year old boy who works in the stables (both he and the niece are horse-crazy), handsome and much too refined for a stable boy (his origins unknown). Edward is teaching them both. By the end of the book, by sheer accident, it was discovered that David's relatives are "noble" people leaving nearby.

My wife says the book was well written in excellent English and she wants to find and reread it.

I wonder if anybody could name the author or the title? Thanks, ---AboutFace 22 (talk) 16:23, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Possibly A London Season by Joan Wolf? Tevildo (talk) 17:12, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

@Tevildo: Thank you, but she said, no. She says she has most of Joan Wolf's books and knows them well. Besides it is a rural setting, not London's. --AboutFace 22 (talk) 17:18, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Less possibly, The Runaway Duke by Julie Anne Long? The names are wrong and the reviews aren't that good, but the heroine's father is interested in science. This thread on Amazon has some more suggestions for books with the same basic theme. Tevildo (talk) 17:39, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

@Tevildo: Thank you, but she said it is not correct again. She said the duke or whatever the nobleman's title never ran away but as you probably understand, any suggestion is very much appreciated. She is also very certain about the names. --AboutFace 22 (talk) 21:10, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

AboutFace 22, it may be easiest for you to track this down yourself. If you go to Amazon.com and select Your Orders, then Digital Orders placed in 2011, you should see the purchase of the book. John M Baker (talk) 04:42, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

What's the average height of a Medieval cathedral?

Does it matter much if you count the tallest one a city ever had or just what exists now? Cause some got damaged/destroyed by wind, fire, World War II etc. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:43, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

What parts do you want to measure? Because some have towers and spires...we have List of highest church naves, which measures the top of the interior ceiling, and therefore ignores whatever else there may be outside. There is also List of tallest church buildings in the world. We'd have to go through the list and find all the medieval ones, but remember also that not all the parts of the church would necessarily have been there in the Middle Ages, since they often took centuries to complete. Adam Bishop (talk) 23:26, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Total height. You're right about taking that list with a grain of salt. It says my city's cathedral is 1878 but the article says the spires were added 1888. Should I change the list? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:55, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

In the UK, the Victorians slapped spires on hundreds of medieval churches. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 07:18, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

And lots more fell down or met with other accidents, like the 149 metre spire of Old St Paul's Cathedral, which caught fire and collapsed in 1561. Alansplodge (talk) 12:47, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Possibly confounding factor: There are several medieval churches that are now cathedrals (eg Southwark, St Albans) which were not cathedrals in the Middle Ages. AlexTiefling (talk) 13:09, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

USS Mercedita

Can anybody find any information about this painting of the USS Mercedita (1861)? Like who created it and when was it created?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:45, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Have you tried asking the Naval History and Heritage Command, which is credited (as the Naval Historical Center) as the source of the picture? Rojomoke (talk) 06:40, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Samuel Byck

Hi. My queries are about Samuel Joseph Byck (1930-1974). 1- In the film "The Assassination of Richard Nixon" it appears that he had a brother named Julius. Is a historical fact or fiction? 2- What were his parent´s names? Thanks. Daniel, 4 July 2016 88.10.201.162 (talk) 07:11, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

• Pages automatically checked for accidental language links
• Misplaced Pages resources for researchers
• Misplaced Pages help forums
• Misplaced Pages reference desk