Moved the question to Language Desk. --12.18.10.148 (talk) 21:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is a good film or television program that educates students about prejudice and discrimination in both the past and the present or a program that fights the stereotypes and prejudices that we sometimes see in the media? (It must be relevant to high school student viewers). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.18.62.37 (talk) 05:53, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stand and Deliver is a classic dealing with high schools and breaking common stereotypes. --Jayron32 06:01, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oddly, what comes to mind as the best lesson is, in fact, a class lesson scene in the 50's movie Blackboard Jungle. It is when the class actually begins to think about "fairy tale morality" as exemplified by "Jack and the Beanstalk." Why is the Giant the villain? He's minding his own business, not bothering anyone, while Jack commits breaking-and-entering, burglary, and murder. But then, the Giant is "different." ("People are always afraid of what's different." ... Cool Runnings) You can take it from there. One shouldn't need some flick showing members of Group X as good people to get the point across. B00P (talk) 06:42, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the Giant being seen as the bad guy came from his statement about wanting to eat Jack. While not condoning his breaking and entering, I do think that Jack would be able to make a convincing argument for self defense if he was brought to court for his role in the Giant's "accident" 65.121.141.34 (talk) 15:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To Kill a Mockingbird is a pretty powerful statement, although I'm not so sure it's high school material, being rather adult-themed. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 06:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree with you there, I must say. To To Kill a Mockingbird, or at least I would say, is a book that most high schoolers could understand. I read it in high school and found it to be a very eye opening portrait of racism and the conflict that still exists in our society. There are some mature themes, but ones that I think most teens could handle. If you are looking for a movie, I would certainly suggest Freedom Writers. It is a great portrait of interracial tensions in a high school environment (does include gang violence). - Regards, Gaelen S.^{Talk • Contribs} 07:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To Kill a Mockingbird was a set text for my O level English (back in 1973 - 5)! (for non-UK residents that meant I started studying it aged 14.) --TammyMoet (talk) 08:48, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Australia, To Kill a Mockingbird was a set text for studying in English when I was in high school (late 1970's) and again/still when my son studied high school English (less than five years ago). Mitch Ames (talk) 11:45, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure we read that while I was still in elementary school, in the US. Circa 7th or 8th grade or so (11-12). Saw the movie then, too. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I read it (and watched the film) in high school and found it a little alien, but understandable enough to get the message. I think the film was better in some ways, but I really needed the help of a teacher to provide the background; southern Ontario just isn't much like the old Deep South. There was a brief worry that it was going to be removed from some schools' curricula, but it ended up being left in. Those are the only two current articles available, but there were several other Toronto-based articles at one point, all of which praised the book, but which still danced around in euphemisms for the dreaded N-word. That word, by the way, is also why I was the last class at Southwood Secondary School to read Huckleberry Finn. Someone, please protect our children from history! Matt Deres (talk) 14:42, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about In the Heat of the Night (film)? --Phil Holmes (talk) 10:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that In the Heat of the Night is particularly relevant to high school students. Movies about mid-20th century racism in the American South that are more relevant would include The Great Debaters, The Long Walk Home, and Once Upon a Time ... When We Were Colored. —Kevin Myers 11:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's To Sir With Love - set in London, admittedly, but it should cover the required subject matter. Do The Right Thing is contemporary and American, but the amount of bad language might make it unsuitable for a high-school audience. Tevildo (talk) 12:05, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let That Be Your Last Battlefield would certainly get high marks from the geeks. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:52, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was like driving in a nail with a sledgehammer, even when it was first-run. But the point it makes is still good - the enherent illogic of racism. Another Trek episode, more along the lines of the Jack/Giant story, could be "The Devil in the Dark". →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 15:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm a doctor, not a bricklayer."

"You're a healer, there's a patient. That's an order."

Gotta love TOS at its best. Though "Last Battlefield" is just barely better than "Space Hippies". PhGustaf (talk) 22:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a great bit of dialogue. Kirk never left any doubt about who was in charge. That episode I think is where the Vulcan mind-meld was first used, leading to some funny bit about how the Horta thought Spock's ears where "humans'" best feature (if I'm not getting my stories mixed up). Perhaps the most startling bit of dialogue is where the miners are poised to kill the Horta, and Kirk informs them that he will kill any man who harms the Horta. Trek in itself was considered an object lesson in diversity, what with various nationalities and races represented, which seems normal now but was definitely a big deal in 1966. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 22:29, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I was in junior high and high school, we watched Remember the Titans at least five or six times in about four different subjects. By grade eleven, it had kind of become cliche as the "anti-stereotypes movies" that every teacher made us watch, but the first time they showed it to us, in grade eight, it was pretty powerful. Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 18:07, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In high school, we both read and watched Twelve Angry Men, which deals with prejudice in a legal context. It's been one of my favorite movies ever since. Kingsfold (talk) 19:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Tucker was a Confederate soldier in the 16th Alabama regiment. I know that he was captured on 19 Dec 1864 near Courtland, Lawrence, Alabama. How do I find out what Union regiment captured him and where he was held prisoner? Wrad (talk) 23:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to this source, your best bet would be:

Archives I Textual Reference Branch

National Archives and Records Administration

Washington, D.C. 20408

1-866-272-6272

Marco polo (talk) 13:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[1] says the 16th Alabama Infantry Regiment was consolidated with other infantry regiments from late in 1864 until war's end and called "1st Alabama Infantry Regiment, Consolidated." There is an historical account of the 16th Alabama Infantry , including newspaper accounts and historical accounts by veterans at the Alabama state archives. Per a unit history it was in the fighting at Shiloh, Murfreesboro, Chicamauga, and the fighting around Atlanta. Figure out what battle took place on the day in question, and you will see who was on the union side against Tucker's Confederate unit. From diaries or newspaper accounts, you might learn where other POWs captured in that fight were sent. Edison (talk) 18:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any case of violent crime in Saudi Arabia (rape, murder, etc.). It seems to be that Shari'a law works. --Maru-Spanish (talk) 04:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, never. And not the least whisper of dissent either. There's just nothing to complain about under shari'a.--Wetman (talk) 05:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well it really depends on your definition or "works". But if you're attempting to advocate Shari'a law here then I think you are in the wrong place. It's also one of the most barbaric and totalitarian systems in the world. The law allows murderous retribution, stoning and beheading as a sentence for offences other then murder (like apostasy from Islam!) flogging for neglecting prayer duties and also the amputation of limbs for theft, including that of foreigners. I'm sure that's not the lot of it. Vespine (talk) 05:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And before someone acuses me of bigotry, i did mean that the Reference desk is the wrong place to advocate ANY kind of law. So to answer the OP directly on good faith. YES there are cases of violent crime in Saudi Arabia, we even have an article about it Crime in Saudi Arabia, we also have a List of countries by intentional homicide rate which shows Saudi Arabia towards the bottom of the list so yes their cases of violent crime are low, but with many notable non Shari'a law countries lower, including Japan, Austria, Norway. Vespine (talk) 05:24, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not defending the Shari'a law.... Vespine, I asked if there is any known case of violent crime in Saudi Arabia because I want to know about it... I'd never defend the Shari'a law because the Shari'a law is against the kind of person I am... --Maru-Spanish (talk) 05:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to this source, whose reliability I can't assess, there is indeed violent crime in Saudi Arabia, including rape and murder. If the rate of such crime is lower than in other countries, this is not necessarily because of the deterrent effect of Shari'a. Many other factors go into crime rates, including what the Romans called mores, or cultural and subcultural attitudes toward individual violence, the strength of family relationships that could, on the one hand, shame a potential criminal into not committing the crime, or, on the other, provide the potential criminal with enough material support that he is not driven to commit crimes to meet his material needs, and he is deterred from committing crime because he has something to lose in the form of family material support. Also, the Saudi custom of segregating women, while it impedes women's freedom and human rights, may have the side benefit that few women find themselves alone in places where they are likely to be raped. Another consideration is that Saudi Arabia's patriarchal culture may make it unlikely that women would report rapes they suffer from male family members. Marco polo (talk) 14:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The statistics of tyrants are valueless. It's entirely impossible to make meaningful comparisons between the crime rates of democratic countries and those of undemocratic ones. Democracy is much more than just voting; it's a proper system of checks, recourse, and review over how the state works. In a democratic country, if the police or prosecutors don't apply a law fairly and pursue wrongdoers with due application, aggrieved victims can take steps to have them censured or their hand forced (whether that's executive agencies like the UK's Police Complaints Authority or judicial ones like the courts); whistleblowers are protected, opposition politicians can hold inquiries, pressure groups can protest, and individual citizens can raise a fuss. If the British Prime Minister can't get away with charging a somewhat above average cleaning bill to the government, you can be sure he's not lettings his friends get away with murder or creaming millions out of the bank of England for his mum. This doesn't happen in undemocratic countries; whole swathes of the population are above the law entirely (those with connections to the rulers), bribery and corruption are commonplace, and the intimidation and perversion of judges, juries (if they exist), prosecutors, witnesses, and complainants can happen unchecked. Moreover, the governments of undemocratic countries are desperate to make everything appear to be working well (because they're paranoid that they'll be regarded as corrupt and incompetent, and violently overthrown), so they're highly motivated to fiddle the figures to make everything look hunky dory. All of these actions are risky and usually criminal in democratic countries, but in undemocratic countries fiddling juries and fudging government statistics is easy (for the wealthy, the powerful, and the connected). So undemocratic countries report magically tiny crime rates. They also report low rates of infectious disease, food contamination, building-standards violations (hello Chinese school builders), political or religious dissent (99% of the population love the president), corruption (Al Yamamah), and general unhappiness. You can mostly trust the statistics of a democracy not because those in government are intrinsically more honest (although often they are too), but because there are layers of bureaucrats, lawyers, activists, opposition politicans, and concerned citizens who won't let the government away with anything. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 19:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tangentially to the original Question but pertinent to the ensuing discussion remember that, just as Islam takes widely varying, locally ethnically influenced forms worldwide, Shari'a law is not a single worldwide unified code of laws and punishments. Some jurisdictions in "the West" still apply the Death Penalty, but it would not be accurate to say that this is characteristic of contemporary Western legal systems in general. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 19:23, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree completely with Finlay McWalter's comments and did not mean to suggest uncritical acceptance of Saudi crime statistics. (As I said, I can't assess their reliability.) For the reasons Finlay mentions, the statistics are not reliable, though this U.S. government source suggests that levels of crime are lower than in most parts of the United States. Marco polo (talk) 20:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That depends if you consider beheading by saber a violent crime. Oh, but the judge said he was guilty... Vranak (talk) 22:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A legal execution can not in any way be considered a crime, violent or otherwise, as a crime is by definition an illegal act. Googlemeister (talk) 15:43, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It cannot? How about 'gross violation of decency'?

Seriously, would you cut a man's head off for any reason whatsoever? Then why would it be OK (legal) for someone else to do it? Vranak (talk) 16:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because if a legitimately recognized government (Which Saudi Arabia is for most, if not all nations) creates a law which says that anyone who spits on the sidewalk (as an extreme example) is to be executed by removal of their head with a sword, then your feelings are irrelevant. No crime is committed when a the government carries out the sentence, because THAT IS THE LAW. I do not condone many of the laws there, but if the execution is done according to their laws, it is certainly NOT a crime. It is a concept called sovereignty that allows nations to have their own laws. Googlemeister (talk) 18:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's the difference between marginal utility and marginal benefit?--Elatanatari (talk) 05:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marginal benefit redirects to Marginal utility but is not mentioned in that article. From this, I deduce either an embarrassing error or that marginal benefit and marginal utility are two names for the same thing. I suspect the latter. Bielle (talk) 05:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marginal benefit is the same as marginal utility in economics terms. I'd avoid the term marginal benefit in economics as it has a common usage meaning the benefit of something is probably small if it exists at all. Marginal utility is much less commonly used for anything except the economics meaning. 18:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I see someone saying they're different in [2] saying "The marginal benefit of a good is the dollar value a person places on the marginal utility enjoyed from that good" Another one says benefit can be measured in terms of utility. so you takes your choices, hair splitting I think. Dmcq (talk) 18:37, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The usage of marginal utility is clear – the increase in utility caused usually by consumption of a good or service. Marginal benefit is sometimes used as a synonym of marginal utility, but is also used to denote the increase in production, revenue or profits by a firm from an action (hiring an employee, selling a good etc.). LK (talk) 07:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WEST HAM UNITED'S GROUND NAME:

Please advise me how West Ham's Ground came to be called The Boleyn Ground? Is there any connection with Ann Boleyn?

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.31.38.47 (talk) 10:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read our article on the Boleyn Ground? The name is explained in the third sentence. Warofdreams talk 10:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

President Obama spoke of establishing a Civilian Security Force or National Civilian Security Force during his presidential campaign. Will this be implemented now that he is president? --68.175.44.30 (talk) 14:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by how hard it has been to get his healthcare reforms passed, it may be even harder to get any other big ticket items accomplished. But I'm no WP:CRYSTALBALL. Dismas|^(talk) 14:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We don't do predictions here, but you can read about some of the proposals at Universal National Service Act. --Sean 15:18, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was the Lord Milne who said that war consisted of "short periods of intense fear and long periods of intense boredom" this Lord Milne? Ericoides (talk) 15:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A brief on-line search finds that the quotation is generally attributed to J C Smuts, but quotations do have a tendency to attach themselves to famous people. I don't know of a definitive source for the quote myself. Tevildo (talk) 17:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see; thanks for that. Alan Moorehead, in the second volume of his Desert War trilogy, A Year of Battle, writes of "the slowness that Lord Milne meant when he spoke of war as consisting of short periods of intense fear and long periods of intense boredom", and I searched online with the quote I cited above +Milne. No wonder I couldn't find it if it was Smuts's remark. But it wouldn't be the first time that (the generally wonderful) Moorehead was factually mistaken in these books... Ericoides (talk) 17:56, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's entirely possible that Field Marshal Lord Milne was heard to say it, or a variant thereof, on some occasion without this meaning that he himself coined it. It's a widespread meme in the worldwide Military, another version being "Warfare consists of long periods of boredom punctuated by moments of terror", as you can see by googling that phrase. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 19:10, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It brings up one hit ... this one.

Who were the Viatychians?

Prior to the middle of the 19th century, ethnic Ukrainians referred to themselves as Rusyns. ... The ethnonym Ukrainian came into widespread use only in modern times for political reasons, replacing the ethnonym Rusyn initially in Sloboda Ukraina, then on the banks of the Dnieper River, and spreading to western Ukraine in the 1930s.

— Rusyns#Location

I have not been able to find information as to these political reasons. What are they?174.3.117.120 (talk) 17:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Viatychians are more often called the Viatychi. They were a Slavic tribe on the northern or northeastern edges of the Kievan Rus who are thought to be among the probable ancestors of modern ethnic Russians.

As for the political reasons, our account in Name of Ukraine suggests that the ethnonym did not spread in a steady geographic procession as your quote suggests but instead as a result of shifts in identity politics across the region during the 1800s. According to our article, those who adopted the label Ukrainian did so to assert a distinct ethnic identity rather than a shared identity with other heirs of the Kievan Rus as Rusyns or with Russian-speaking "Great Russians" as "Little Russians" (Malorossi). I lack the expertise to judge whether your quote or our article has the more reliable account. However, our article seems reasonably well sourced and provides the "political reason" mentioned by your quote, even if it calls into question the supposed historical process described in your quote. Marco polo (talk) 17:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's article is at Vyatichs.--Wetman (talk) 05:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could anyone possibly direct me as to where I could find a transliterated Yiddish text, along with its translation, of Itzik Manger's poem 'Ovnt Lid' (Evensong)? I would be immensely grateful! Luthinya (talk) 17:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a transliteration on this page (it is the first of two songs there). I haven't found an English translation. --Cam (talk) 03:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will attempt a nonexpert, nonrhyming translation:

Evening Song

Quiet evening. Dark gold.

I sit by my glass of wine.

What has come of my day?

A shadow and a shine

At least a little dark gold should

Come into my song.

Quiet evening. Dark gold.

An old, gray Jew

Prays piously away from the dust

Of the yearly fair.

At least a murmur from the Jew should

Come to me in song

Quiet evening. Dark gold.

Wind, world-out world-in.

My sorrow which has been awake

Falls asleep like a little deer.

At least a breath of sleep should

Come to me in song.

Quiet evening. Dark gold.

A summer bird flies

With his wings of gray and gold

Away into "God protect"

At least a flutter from his flight should

Come to me in song.

Quiet evening. Dark gold.

I sit by my glass of wine.

What has come of my day?

A shadow and a shine

At least a little dark gold should

Come into my song.

Marco polo (talk) 13:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful. Worthy of a Mahler setting.--Wetman (talk) 20:37, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have to do a crossword about Julius Caesar, and I can't figure out a few of the clues. What are the answers to them? I've provided the letters that I already know from other words.

• Reported Caesar's refusal of the crown: -A-C-
• What Antony enjoys: SP----
• Poetic form used by Shakespeare: ------E--E
• "_____ should be made of sterner stuff.": -M---I--

--75.39.193.116 (talk) 21:34, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Wikipedia Reference Desk. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misevaluation, but it is our policy here to not do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn what the assignment was intended to teach. —Akrabbim^talk 21:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At the top of the page, it says "If your question is homework, show that you have attempted an answer first, and we will try to help you past the stuck point." This is what I've done, since there are approximately 50 questions on the crossword and I'm only stuck on those four that I can't figure out. --75.39.193.116 (talk) 21:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can find the answer to your first unknown at Julius Caesar (play)#Characters and to the last two at William Shakespeare#Style and here, respectively. I'm not entirely sure about the second one. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 22:26, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the last question just copy the part quote you have into Google - add some quotation marks and press search. For the penultimate one, I think your teacher may have mis-spelt "pentameter"! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alansplodge (talk • contribs) 22:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(EC)Minimal google-fu gets 3 out of four; arguably you lack ambition. But like Amorymeltzer, I'm stumped by question 2. A search for sp* through the text of JC wasn't very enlightening. I'd be grateful if, when you get the answers, you post 2. back here. It would help if there was an online concordance builder able to take a URL as an argument ... I've not found one in a quick search. Agree with the mis-spelling though I don't think we need give out the answer...--Tagishsimon (talk) 22:38, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to three is not pentameter. The link I gave has the answer, though, in a rather obvious manner. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 22:52, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So the clue should be ----- -E--E? --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Pentameter" has more than one spelling, although the other answer makes sense too. Of course, the other words will tell which is correct. --Anonymous, 06:15 UTC, October 13, 2009.

Yes, it does, but perhaps your link is not quite on the money. From my experience, the -re spelling is very much in the minority, even here in Britain. - Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 16:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does Antony enjoy "speech"? A little odd, but he does it a lot... Adam Bishop (talk) 23:27, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All I could come up with was that, spirit, or speaks, but none of them make any sense. Sadly, Cleopatra doesn't fit. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 23:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe "sports", as Cleo was certainly a good sport. :) →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're thinking of what I am, Tagishimon, but you put an extra blank between the two Es. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 23:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did - now corrected by removing a blank. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like doing someone else's homework, either, so I hope this isn't for credit. Without looking at the play, my suspicion is that you might get some idea of Marc Antony's enjoyments from the scene where Caesar says, "Yon Cassius hath a lean and hungry look..." (Yes, many of us know the next line without looking, but no need to say more than needed.) —— Shakescene (talk) 05:51, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For homework, legal advice, etc. try the Answerbank.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this being treated like homework? I don't see any statements about this puzzle except that it's a crossword puzzle, and a crossword is much more likely to be for enjoyment than for schoolwork. Nyttend (talk) 05:55, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the "I have to do a crossword" as an indication that it was an assignment, and also the fact that many of the questions could be very easily solved with Google (the last quote is heavily quoted). That was just the impression that I got. —Akrabbim^talk 16:49, 17 October 2009

The characters in South Park, Simpsons, Family Guy and just about every other cartoon never seem to get any older. Is there a cartoon in which the characters are aging just like real people?

Gasoline Alley would work. Uncle Walt is pushing 120. PhGustaf (talk) 00:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)The same tends to be true of comic strips, with one well-known exception known as Gasoline Alley, which drew some interest in part because even in those days, it was observed that comic strip characters never aged. The characters in Doonesbury have also aged over time. I think the infants in The Flintstones aged somewhat, at least to the point where they were toddlers. As to recent cartoons or comics, someone else would have to cover that. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, by the 1970s, in The Pebbles and Bamm-Bamm Show, the toddlers had grown up to become stereotypically "groovy" teenagers. Malcolm XIV (talk) 00:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The characters in For Better or For Worse get older; it's a comic strip, but there are animated cartoons based on it. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although I don't follow For Better or For Worse closely any more, the author did reach a point when too many of the characters were reaching natural limits, and decided to start all over again from the beginning without necessarily following the same trajectory. Sort of a twist on Groundhog Day. —— Shakescene (talk) 05:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that was pretty strange. It would have been better to just end it. Adam Bishop (talk) 20:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Technically, the characters in Ben 10 age; the sequel Alien Force takes place five years later. HalfShadow (talk) 00:29, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.leasticoulddo.com announced a few years ago the characters would begin to age, although I've seen little to no evidence of it aside from them maturing in personality. That being said, the South Park characters a number of years back (season five maybe?) "grew" up from third to fourth grade. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to recall that the "the baby is getting bigger" phenomenon in Gasoline Alley was parodied in a publication such as Mad Magazine by showing Skeezix literally getting bigger and bigger, rather than maturing, so that he remained a baby but became gigantic. Edison (talk) 03:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The character of the son, Gene, in the comic Arlo and Janis has aged. He is now in college. Dismas|^(talk) 05:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't there aging in Peanuts, to an extent? I think Sally started out younger than she ended up being...I seem to remember a few strips doing this "aging babies to some fixed age", but I can't remember anything in specific. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 06:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. There's also Linus and Lucy's young brother called "Rerun", who was born during the strip and slowly aged to around pre-school age and then stopped. He looked like a miniature version of Linus, and wasn't really used that much. But all the Peanuts kids started out a little younger than they ended up being. However, they typically talked like adults would, in general, which was the whole point. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Peppermint Patty seemed to get younger. She seemed noticeably older than Marcy when she was first introduced. APL (talk) 13:43, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TV Tropes catalogues this sort of thing exhaustively. Not Allowed To Grow Up is the opposite of what you're talking about, but search the page for "avert". AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 09:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In case there are any accountants and financial types hanging out here, please have a look at this post at the Computing desk. Thanks. Zunaid 07:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ExitRight (talk) 11:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can read the article. The result was a British military victory. Afghans got to maintain internal sovereignty but ceded control of foreign relations to the British.--Shahab (talk) 11:43, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Just wondering why The Great Game article says "The second war was almost as disastrous as the first for the British, and by 1881, they again pulled out of Kabul." I suppose the Great Game article is just plain wrong. ExitRight (talk) 12:37, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not entirely wrong. The British did lose many men. The linked site has some more info.--Shahab (talk) 13:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The OP may be interested in reading Pyrrhic victory which may be the source of confusion. Sometimes the nominal "victor" makes off much worse than the "loser" in a battle or war. --Jayron32 19:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That all said, parts of the Great Game article do appear to read a little more like an editorial than an encyclopedia. TastyCakes (talk) 19:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

with examples explain characteristics of factor of production. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.194.38.5 (talk) 15:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What sort of production and what kind of factors? Falconus^{p t c} 15:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is our policy here to not do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. In this case, you will probably want to read up on the factors of production themselves (not all will have been chosen for you to look at in any details). If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know. - Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 16:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(ATBLA is the organization that promotes and Administers the Los Angeles Black Gay pride event that occurs during the fourth of July American independence Day Celebration, the ATB stands for At The Beach which exists as the focal point for the black pride events. The Usual Beach party/ Pride celebration occurs every year for 26yrs now, the non profit organization started a trend for black LGBT which resulted in the formation of an annual black gay pride event across the USA and now being done all over the world today In the summer of 1988, Duane Bremond and a group of friends decided to come together to organize and enjoy a day "At the Beach" on the 4th of July. Every year since, At the Beach (ATB) has grown in participants and in scope. It has become the nation's largest recognized Black lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender pride celebration. 20,000 + attendees over week long celebration 40&percent; of ATB attendees are from out of state Only event in California that brings together thousands of Black lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people Today, ATB is a progressive and socially responsible organization over 20,00 strong. ATB strives to provide unity celebrations as a networking forum for lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender of African descent to increase awareness in areas such as health, civic, and community empowerment.)

I Have created the ATBLA information into Wiki not as a representative of ATBLA but as a concerned person because very little information appear to exist on black pride in Wikipedia. Most of the information I have added where actually received from the ATBLA webpage, Social networking sites as you have stated, also from reads on online news source and news articles including but not limited to

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-79460616.html http://www.eurweb.com/story/eur15190.cfm And the Los Angeles Sentinel

Bloggs http://simplyfredsmith.blogspot.com/2005/07/atbla-literary-panel.html http://www.jasmynecannick.com/

and personal attendants of a couple of the ATBLA meetings, I may have created the Information under ATBLA because I choose to name it as such since i found no information on the organization on here, no information on Black gay pride and also no information on the international federation of the black gay pride.

This are very important information first because the black pride movement/ events and celebration took root in Los Angeles through the work of the ATBLA and as quickly but over the years become an international event where all cities pick a date to celebrate in their own fashion, ATBLA had giving courage to black LGBT communities, showing them that they can be black and it's ok to be gay, lesbian, transgender and still celebrate their existence.

While writing my article, one of the rules was that I could not put in any URL. So I had to take all the URL's out and stream line my article according to the policy since the original would not post

Please let me know how I can reformat this article so that it can be accepted by Wiki. It's shameful that the black LGBT community is not well represented in Wiki discuss, probably as a result of no fault of Wiki; Possibly because no one has even bothered to talk about it or write about it on wiki or most other medium. The black community in general feels marginalized and have taking a defeatist position "we can't be bothered because we will not be accepted anyway" this is even worse within the Black LGBT community who feels they can't be accepted by the larger black community and worse still by the general public

I have taking up the personal mission to make a change on this issues, please furnish me with more details on how I can achieve this objective of online medium inclusion on the black LGBT . I will be adding more information as time permits on Wiki and other online mediums as I find them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ATBLA (talk • contribs) 17:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the reference desk; it's for asking questions which aren't related to Wikipedia. You would do well to address the issues discussed in the prod deletion template on Atbla; in particular it needs multiple independent reliable sources that support your claims. Coverage in newspapers, magazines, radio and tv, academic works, etc. The description you've given of this organisation would strongly suggest that it'd be covered by lots of reliable publications, so include those mentions. Reliable sources tells you how. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 17:29, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at Portal:LGBT (especially the Topics & Categories tab) which may provide links to related topics. The "WikiProjects & Things you can do" tab will lead you to a "requested articles" section; and the 'discussion' tab on each of these pages may be a place to look for other editors to help you with the articles you're interested in creating or improving. Finally, Finlay McWalter is correct: This page is a Reference Desk page, where we just answer questions that people have; the WP:Help Desk is a better place to ask than here about questions about creating Wikipedia articles. Best of luck, and remember, WP:BOLD. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hi there,

does anyone in Toronto have any idea why there are two mosques with the same address? Here is the site: website shows the the mosques with the same address-120 Bermondsey Rd Toronto, Ont. M4A 1X5. How do I know which one is which? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.53.251 (talk) 17:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It could be a misprint, or it could be two mosques sharing the same building, or with offices in the same building, or meeting in different rooms of the same building. They have different phone numbers so maybe phone one and ask. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, one refers to the mosque proper and the other to the Islamic center / centre (which, according to the website, also contains Sunday schools and other cultural services for the Muslim community). --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Hi, I've been reading and thinking about The Grapes of Wrath and I was just wondering about the actual history of that era. In a few places in the book Steinbeck talks about how the Californian corporations were trying their hardest to ignore the hungry migrants, and how in doing that they cemented their own destruction, because mass hunger is going to come out somehow. In fact, in the same chapter where he explains the title of the book (he compares the grapes that the corporations grow and then throw away in front of the hungry migrants to the grapes of wrath in the Bible, and how the corporations are therefore "ripe for destruction") he implies that some kind of upheaval against the corporations is inevitable. So... what happened, anyways? I don't remember hearing about any famous upheaval in California at that time! I do know that a lot of the Okies persevered, eventually became prosperous, and settled comfortably in California. My best guess is that World War II in 1939 ended the Great Depression, so the migrants got their food and were happy, and the cause of the impending upheaval disappeared. Am I right? Jonathan ^talk 18:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might check out History_of_California_1900_to_present#Organized_labor, though unfortunately the article jumps around quite a bit. What you're really asking about is California labor history. I don't know it extremely well, I'm ashamed to say (as a native Californian), but my understanding is that yes, World War II changed the dynamics of labor quite a bit, not so much that the Midwesterners "got their food and were happy" but that they were able to move out of the agricultural sector (and replaced instead by Latino migrants, who were not happy and did not have their food... see César Chávez). --Mr.98 (talk) 18:57, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On your question, "What happened to the Okies?", I don't have much to add. Their situation tended to improve when the demand for labor, particularly in California's factories and shipyards, soared during World War II. They got decent-paying blue-collar jobs and/or bought land of their own, and many of their children went to college and got white-collar jobs. Many of them populated the suburbs that sprang up around California after the war. On your embedded question about what Steinbeck meant, remember that in the 1930s, the Russian Revolution was recent memory, and communist and socialist movements seemed to be gaining strength in Europe and to a lesser degree in the United States. Some people felt that there was a real possibility of a socialist revolution in the United States unless conditions changed. One of the main reasons that Franklin D. Roosevelt won election and re-election as president during the 1930s was that his New Deal seemed to many the best hope for the United States to avoid such a revolution. As long as masses of people were out of work and hungry, a revolution seemed to remain a possibility. While the New Deal and the slow economic recovery after 1937 helped, the war really turned things around. Marco polo (talk) 19:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was a General Strike in San Francisco supporting the 1934 West Coast waterfront strike, and even a General Strike in Oakland as late as 1947 (starting in Capwell's department store). In 1934, Upton Sinclair, author of The Jungle and a founder of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society in 1905, won the Democratic nomination for Governor leading the EPIC (End Poverty in California movement), and nearly won. The labor militancy was not very successful in transferring from the cities to the fields at the time (see Steinbeck's In Dubious Battle or Carey McWilliams's Factories in the Fields), but it was no more unreasonable at the time for Steinbeck to think that massive social upheaval was likely than for others to assume the opposite (and in fact they didn't). ¶ As for the original question, when I was taking the 1980 Census in Berkeley and Oakland, I found that those born after 1940 (black and white) tended to be born in California, and those born before were often from the South. Henry Kaiser sent recruiters throughout the South to attract workers of both races to the wartime shipyards, cement plants and steel foundries of Oakland, Alameda, Vallejo and other Bay Area cities. In the 1960s and 1970s, southern Alameda County (San Leandro, Hayward, Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin and Fremont) was stereotypically, Democratic, white, working-class or lower-middle-class and socially quite conservative, electing conservative District Attorneys like Edwin Meese and conservative sheriffs like Frank Madigan, who would clash with the radical students and activists of Berkeley. (See Free Speech Movement, Vietnam Day Committee and People's Park.) In the Central Valley itself, essentially Southern white working-class attitudes were reflected by Johnny Cash and Merle Haggard (who first gained fame with his "Okie from Muskogee" and "Fighting Side of Me", but later asked "Are the Good Times Really Over for Good?"), and in Southern California, the very conservative State Senate President Hugh Burns and Los Angeles Mayor Sam Yorty were elected as Democrats, not Republicans. —— Shakescene (talk) 09:06, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yorty? He wasn't "very conservative" until after WWII. He was strongly pro-union, and supported by the CPUSA; it wasn't until they refused to endorse him for mayor in 1938 that his politics started moving right. He was much more a populist than a conservative. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 17:52, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Oakies became the parents of the surfers and hippies. DOR (HK) (talk) 02:14, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the insight! I suppose the real question I was asking was why wasn't there a major revolution in the United States in the 1930's? And I think the answer was that such a revolution was quelled by a bunch of factors, mainly World War II, FDR, and the end of the Great Depression. Jonathan ^talk 22:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a huge and very common historical question of the type that can never be fully resolved. The New Deal is part of it, so is the older, very broad question of American exceptionalism. Many argue how much the Roman Catholic Church and socially-conservative evangelical churches, with a genuine working-class or poor-farmer following, played in damping social revolution in one of the more observant of the Christian nations, and one without a strong, corresponding anti-clerical or disestablishmentarian tradition. Yet others look at the structure, purpose and ideology of the labor unions (compare Samuel Gompers, Industrial Workers of the World, Congress of Industrial Organizations, craft unionism and industrial unionism) or at what is seen to be the entrepreneurial, pioneer, independent spirit of American working-men, or at the balance between industrial, agricultural, clerical, technical and small-business occupations. And the divisions between races, and among different white ethnicities, certainly made forming a uniform proletarian. anti-capitalist phalanx far more difficult. (See, for example, New York Draft Riots, Thomas E. Watson and the Southern Tenant Farmers Union). An important, but hard to measure, role was played in the miscalculations and strategic errors of the Left itself, which opposed the New Deal and ran candidates against FDR's Democrats well into, and sometimes past, the 1930's (see, e.g. New York City mayoral elections#Collapse of the Socialist Party vote), thus isolating themselves from a labor movement that had to protect its members' interests in the existing world by supporting friendly major-party politicians. In 1906, the German sociologist Werner Sombart wrote a classic study, Warum gibt es in den Vereinigten Staaten keinen Sozialismus? or "Why is there no socialism in the United States?" in which he said that revolutionary dreams had been shipwrecked on the "shoals of roast beef", i.e. the actual and perceived relative prosperity of American workers, who would have less cause for discontent and more to lose from upheaval. (This ignores the fact the U.S. had one of the bloodiest histories of labor struggle.) Sombart also adduced as an explanation the egalitarian ("Tocquevillean") history and ideology of the U.S., and the absence of hereditary class distinctions and class-consciousness. For counter-arguments and alternative arguments, see, for example, Seymour Martin Lipset and Gary Marks, It Didn't Happen Here: Why socialism failed in the United States (Norton, 2000, ISBN 0-393-04098-4), Michael Harrington's Socialism (Saturday Review Press, 1973, ISBN 0-8415-0141-6), Christopher Lasch's The Agony of the American Left, Daniel Bell's Marxian Socialism in the United States (Princeton, 1967) or Irving Howe's Socialism and America. And I have glossed over a wide array of other possible arguments, from both my left and my right, probably better expounded by those whose own views are closer. —— Shakescene (talk) 06:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was just reading a BBC puff piece about weird food from around the world, and it mentions something it calls "seagull wine"[3]--supposedly consumed by Inuits, who stuff a dead seagull in a bottle with water and wait for it to ferment. I'm from Alaska and generally familiar with Inuit culture and have never heard of anything like this. Is this a myth or for real? Can anyone find a reliable/scholarly source mentioning seagull wine (perhaps by another name)? Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds unlikely. Alcohol comes from fermented carbs, not poultry, though poultry has been used as a seasoning[4]. Do you think you could make beer out of a chicken?

The cocktail article might be of interest. PhGustaf (talk) 21:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although beer can chicken seems a likely match, this item sounds more like Inuit Igunaq, Swedish Surströmming or Icelandic Hákarl, which are all -- ahem -- "foods". --Sean 22:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reminds me of garum, although that was not an alcoholic drink. Adam Bishop (talk) 22:38, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Garum lives on, in a way, in Worcestershire Sauce. It does include aged anchovies. PhGustaf (talk) 00:02, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: that link is not anything to do with the BBC, it's on the website of the Daily Telegraph; nor is it a puff piece, at least according to this definition [5] Malcolm XIV (talk) 23:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suppose I have approximately $200,000 (US) to live on for the next 15 years. Where would be the best place to live to have that money last the longest or to get the best value. I would need to have accomodations, relatively inexpensive lifestyle, now single, 47 years of age and currently speak only English. I would like access to reasonable civilized items (i.e. banks, resturants, relatively crime free, etc), nice comfortable climate and to able to get there with only a backback or two. There would obviously be a certain standard of living that needs to defined. I am not thinking about living in a Penthouse room in Vegas - where that money could/would last only a short period - but nor am I thinking about a cabin in the Yukon wilderness either. My first thoughts would be somewhere in Portugal or Brazil - but they are picked with no real reason at all - so I am certainly open for suggestion. I am not a criminal running from the law(nor do I intend to be one), nor am I escaping or shirking any family responsibilities - I am just thinking about going somewhere else for a while. Any thoughts or lifestyle suggestions?142.68.42.8 (talk) 20:59, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone told me once you could live very happily off a dollar a day in Thailand or Vietnam. I'd think Portugal would be quite expensive(although cheaper than, say, Spain), and Brazil increasingly so... TastyCakes (talk) 21:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was a time not that long ago when Eastern Europe was relatively cheap; my wife reports that, on a visit to Prague in 1997 she could get a 5-course dinner at a fancy restaurant for about $5.00; though I imagine that in 12 years the standards of living may have changed considerably. Our article on Prague notes the 12th highest GDP (PPP) among EU cities, but also notes that "the price level is significantly lower than in comparable cities," Which would indicate a city with lots of ammenities by low prices. Perhaps other Eastern European cities may offer a better shot... --Jayron32 21:48, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the Dominican Republic? TastyCakes (talk) 21:51, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where are you from? Unless you are very adaptable, you will find some degree of culture shock and discomfort in any low-cost destination. Even Prague, which is a wealthy city by the standards of most countries, has things that are hard to get used to -- the different attitude of the people and the unavailability of familiar foods and consumer products being a couple of examples. You also have to decide what kind of climate is right for you. Prague's climate is similar to Pittsburgh's, with cold winters, whereas Brazil, or most of it anyway, has the intense heat and humidity of the tropics. Living on $200K for 15 years might seem possible now in a low-cost destination, but you have to figure in inflation and exchange rates. Even if you can find work in a country where you don't speak the language, it's not easy to get a work visa or permanent-residence status in most places. (Not that you can't do it, but it can take years of waiting and lots of expense and paperwork.) All things considered, you might want to hold off on retirement until you've got a bigger nest egg, and if you're itching to reduce your cost of living, you might want to consider just moving to a small town in the U.S. where you can get a home for $150,000. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen homes for sale in the high 5 figure range in rural Iowa. Not real convenient and not much in the way of work, though. Costa Rica is the typical place fingered for this kind of lifestyle, just be aware that if you leave for too long the squatters can legally take your house (oops!). I rather liked Argentina when I was there, but finding English speakers outside of the metropolitan areas can be kind of problematic, and don't keep your money in the local banks because the country's economy is not too reliable. SDY (talk) 23:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cautiously assuming that the current very low rates of interest worldwide persist for some time, $200,000 works out to not much more than $13,000 per year for 15 years. Now, assuming that the US dollar holds its current value (though some financial experts fear a collapse in the value of the dollar), that kind of budget would not buy you a lot of comfort in most places with nice restaurants and a low crime rate. Certainly, you won't find a comfortable US-like standard of living at that price anywhere. Thailand used to be appealing, but it is now very politically unstable. I suppose that you might consider someplace like India, where many people speak English, but you would still face culture shock, a lack of many familiar comforts such as flush toilets with seats, and your digestive system would need to go through a very uncomfortable adjustment. If you are inclined to consider India, I would recommend one of the hill stations for their moderate climate. Marco polo (talk) 00:50, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Squat toilets are an advantage to living in third world countries. Bus stop (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could live like this guy in Texas. Probably not everyone's cup of tea though... Also, perhaps you could invest a bunch of the money? If you could get an average of 5% return on that money (which doesn't seem so unreasonable) that'd be $10,000 a year, which I think would be plenty to live off in a lot of places. Not to mention you might want to do something with your time that brings in some kind of income. TastyCakes (talk) 01:52, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting a 5% return at current interest rates after taxes and fees would require a pretty high risk investment. You can't take risks when you need to live off this money. --Tango (talk) 08:46, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Putting it in a savings account or government bond would obviously not cut it, so you are correct a higher degree of risk would be there. A mix of stocks and bonds would generate good years and bad years, although history suggests an average 5% return wouldn't be so unreasonable. You're right about taxes, in such investments the feasibility would all depend on the capital gains tax of the chosen country. However, I was thinking more of a real estate investment - running a bed and breakfast or something. That way he generates money to live off of and give him somewhere to live, and probably gets significant tax advantages. Of course it may not be everybody's idea of retirement. TastyCakes (talk) 15:10, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Asheville sounds nice to me. Or Madison, Wisconsin. Tastes may vary of course. Vranak (talk) 04:10, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, your English will come in handy there. You'll need another place to spend July-September though. --Wetman (talk) 06:07, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah and Bellingham if you can tolerate two weeks with zero sun during some winters. I live up the road and it's a nice verdant region with pleasant people and good food. Vranak (talk) 15:10, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Balancing prices, creature comforts and low crime may be a difficult task. Somebody up there mentioned Eastern Europe, but that train probably already left the station. I can be specific about my country, Slovenia - there is virtualy no crime, plenty of people speak English and you get all the amenities you want (although due to the country's negligable size, large scale internet businesses tend to ignore us - paypal only recently started offering its services here and even that not in full capacity), but the prices would be harsh on your pocket. I did a little computation, and with your budget and considering 15 years, that would mean having to live off about 800 Euro per month. Now, 800 Euro per month is not impossible to live on here, but you'd be on a serious shoestring budget. And the standard of living will probably keep rising, meaning higher prices and less for your Euro. The Chech republic that was mentioned earlier has a comparable economic situation, and my description probably fits for them, as well. TomorrowTime (talk) 07:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you considered mobile accommondation? I've heard of people who buy a small yacht and travel the world. The cost of living is apparantly very cheap as you only need to pay for food, which is bought in bulk at wholesale prices. I do not know how much it would cost to run a camper van and tour the world that way. It would be challenging but not impossible to live off that amount in the UK, mostly due to the high cost of 'real-estate' here. If you are already in the US then you could benefit from the comparatively very low cost of housing in many areas. I would not worry too much about culture-shock - for example if you were living in somewhere like Goa, India, which I understand is more Westernised, then the exotic experiences would be make you feel you were having a life, rather than the bland forgettable stuff of Anglo-Saxonville. Rather than being left with nothing after 15 years, I think you may be better to consider how to invest the money for a small income for ever. I've heard that Costa Rica is a nice place to live from at least two different people - from someone who had travelled a lot and also unconnected from a taxi-driver in the UK who had married someone there, approved of the country very much, and as far as I recall was just in England to earn some money before returning. Hopefully the climate is cooler in the higher altitudes. Try getting a list of all the countries in the world and going through them - many will be obvious no-nos. See also Quality-of-life index and compare that with the external links in the Cost of living article. Update: comparing two such lists highlights Wellington in New Zealand, which has a high quality of life and low living costs for expats. 92.29.126.121 (talk) 21:20, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One thing to factor in is medical costs. By age 62, most people will incur major medical expenses, so you'll either want somewhere with cheap medical care, or with government-provided care. --Carnildo (talk) 00:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No matter where you went, I doubt only being able speak English would still be a big problem after a year or so. You would probably form contacts with locals and the ex-pat community, and have picked up sufficient language skills to get by with most day-to-day things. Just official letters from the city and national government, utilities, etc, might continue to cause you a few problems. As for where, my choice would be Thailand for its low cost of living, reasonable standard of living, and nice weather. Some Caribbean islands might also fit the bill. Astronaut (talk) 17:44, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merging the ideas of that being discussed now at the Language Desk of "Biblical name meanings" under October 11 with the viewpoint that Jesus of Nazareth did not exist as a historical person as proposed in the article Christ myth theory one might postulate then Jesus was not mean to be a person BUT a concept. Using the meanings already brought up in the Language Reference Desk a conclusion might be that Jesus could be "self-subsisting as salvation" as that is the same as "Jehovah as self-subsisting." Going further perhaps it could mean something like "self existence as salvation." Going further and adding the meanings of "deliverer" and "help" perhaps the concept was meant to be something like "self help as salvation" or as "self help as the deliverer as the savior." Just another point of view I am throwing out that is not a Christian religious point of view and goes somewhat with the articles of Christ myth theory and Jesus Christ in comparative mythology. 216.201.1.6 (talk) 22:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a question for the ref desk in there somewhere? TastyCakes (talk) 22:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you are looking for approval to include that in the articles, you as an editor may do that. Be bold, but remember to cite what you say and make it logical. Don't worry if someone removes it or changes it; Wikipedia is constantly changing. Falconus^{p t c} 23:02, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh, we need more edit wars in wikipedia - especially the ones instigated by drive-by IP's. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:10, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Enough of this "drive-by" obsession. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. WP:AGF. Malcolm XIV (talk) 23:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but if the edit contains original research as opposed to solidly sourced material, it is likely to be reverted very quickly. Falconus said 'make it logical': that is not enough. What the OP posted above sounds like original research, and so is not acceptable content for a Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 23:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Make it logical" sounds like an invitation to "synthesize", which is against the guidelines. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True... I thought the citing sources would ensure it wasn't OR, but I should have said that outright. Falconus^{p t c} 23:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing is necessary, but "selective" sourcing can also result in emphasizing a non-standard view of the subject or trying to pull the reader to a non-standard conclusion. Those are not appropriate things to do, but it's a common occurrence and often leads to edit wars: A user will try to use selective sourcing to justify an extreme or personal viewpoint of a subject. That's the encyclopedic version of the old saying, "Figures don't lie, but liars do figure." →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 04:15, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick, write a book and get it accepted as conventional wisdom. Then find someone else to cite its arguments in the article. DOR (HK) (talk) 05:25, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't that the theory postulated by Stephen Colbert? →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 05:29, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that some lazy writers of books start with Wikipedia, and that OR text inserted in a Wikipedia article thus has a good chance of appearing in books from seemingly reliable publishers, which someone might then use to support the Wikipedia statement. Edison (talk) 16:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be in India for three weeks in the near future, so I'm taking some time to get a sense of the culture. From what I understand, Hinduism is the only "new" religion to get acquainted with (Christianity and Islam and Buddhism I've got a basic grasp of). That leaves Sikhism, Jainism, and Hinduism, and a little bit of reading on those articles has been helpful, but some more "vague" questions. My general objective is to get enough of a grounding that I won't make a fool of myself, not any real specifics. I have no dream of learning customs, but I do want to get a sense of values.

1. How religious are the city folks in India, specifically Indore and Hyderabad? 2. How prevalent is Sikhism in the central part of India? The articles seem to imply that it's mostly a northern thing. 3. Are there any other substantial religious groups I'm missing out on?

The other set of questions relates to Indian politics.

1. What are the hot-button items to avoid talking about in pleasant conversation? 2. Is there anywhere I can get a brief overview of recent (i.e. the last ten years or so) history? I know there was a hotel attack and there's been some trouble with Pakistan (something about a new rail line?) but it is literally the other side of the world.

I imagine that they won't expect me to be very savvy on Indian history, but the American equivalent would be coming to the US and not at least recognizing the name of someone like Lincoln or Palin. SDY (talk) 23:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although demographically centred in the Punjab, Sikhs are a noticeable minority in, for example, Delhi.

I'd generally counsel visitors to pretty much any country, if they want to have a pleasant conversation, to avoid talking about politics or religion – particularly if (as you admit to be the case) they don't know very much about it. Malcolm XIV (talk) 23:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you look at some of the many articles in Category:India. --ColinFine (talk) 23:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhism is pretty uncommon outside of northern India. Jainism is also pretty uncommon in most places, but it has left a huge architectural and artistic legacy, and knowing more about it will help you appreciate some of the sights. Our articles should provide an adequate introduction. Your local library should have sources if you want more depth. By all means, read History of India and History of the Republic of India.

I agree with Malcolm XIV that it's best to avoid conversations about politics and religion, unless you have some understanding of local politics and religion and are willing to be impartial and to accept local people's opinions without argument. I have had interesting conversations in foreign countries, mostly about politics, when I take the attitude that "I'm here to learn, and I'm interested in your opinion". While in India a couple of years ago, I found myself in a train compartment with a group of Indian men who started quizzing me about Muslims in the United States and about my politics. When they were satisfied that I was friendly toward Muslims (and critical of a certain American president's efforts to rid the world of evil at the expense of the people of Iraq), we had a wonderful and very informative conversation about the position of Muslims in India. But this kind of conversation takes tact and sensitivity. Marco polo (talk) 00:26, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Get the Lonely planet guidebook for India. It really is the best and well worth the money. Indians are very religious in general, but they don't expect you to follow their customs. The one that you'll notice most is that you must remove your shows when entering a private residence or a religious building. If you see other people taking off their shoes, follow suit. Sikhs are generally known to be trustworthy in India (kinda like Mormons in the US). If you have to trust a stranger, it's best if you choose a Sikh. LK (talk) 06:26, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is removing one's shoes when entering a private residence realy a religious thing, though? We do it here in Slovena, but simply for comfort and hygiene. Same thing in Japan. TomorrowTime (talk) 07:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you are looking for"Hinduism",it can be found in books.Try to find the "Indianness".You can check out Times of India archives for history.But I suggest you go to India with an open mind.Talk about general life not religion,politics and history.Enjoy your stay!!Adi4094 (talk) 09:04, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just returned from a seven-week trip to India. I read John Keay's History of India, which doesn't go completely to the present but which is readable and good. (Though I got bogged down in the ancient kingdoms part... think that's just my lack of interest.) I also just bought Amartya Sen's The Argumentative Indian which I am most of the way through and would also recommend as a look at social and political issues, mostly recent. I thought the Lonely Planet guide was pretty worthless but it might be the best one out there regardless. And re religiosity - even city folk seemed to be pretty religious. I stayed with three families in Indian cities - one Sikh, one Jain, one Hindu - and there was religious stuff going on in the houses of all of them. Definitely a lot more involved in religion than any Western country I've seen. BTW if you have any questions in preparation for your trip feel free to ask! Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:57, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I also recommend John Keay's India. Any city in India of any importance will have dozens of historic sites, and they really come to life once you have a basic grasp of how this multi-linguistic, multi-ethnic subcontinent developed and emerged. Also, I will second Marco polo's comments above -- if you can first establish a rapport and level of respect with someone, then I wholeheartedly recommend you ask them about their religion. Much like how a book on Christian theology can seem a world away from a Sunday mass, there's a lot of details about Hinduism and Jainism that you can only pick up by talking to people who make that religion a part of their daily life. --M@rēino 17:01, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many Russian scientists ended up working in US or UK post '91.Some disappeared(someone told me). Were there any nuclear scientists?Adi4094 (talk) 09:15, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you've phrased this rather vaguely.

1. Did many Russian scientists end up working in the US and UK after the collapse of the USSR? Definitely yes.

2. Were any of them nuclear scientists? Definitely yes. Note that I assuming you mean, "scientists who had some sort of role in nuclear weapons development," because it's not interesting for them to have been nuclear physicists alone (ooh, mesons!).

3. Did any of them "disappear"? Probably, depending on how you define "disappear". I once had to track down a former Soviet nuclear scientist... I found him, in the end, working at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C. Did he disappear? As far as his colleagues and former Soviet friends were concerned, probably—he no longer published, he had no forwarding address, he wasn't easy to find. Did he disappear objectively? No, he just didn't update many people as to where he went, and his English wasn't so great, and he didn't have a webpage. He was just doing his work quietly.

But let's get down to the bigger question. Is there a threat that post-Soviet nuclear weapons physicists could be snapped up by governments or terrorists? Governments, yes, and they surely were by some. By terrorists? Less likely, or at least, less useful. One scientist or two does not a nuclear weapon get you, even if one them happens to be Robert Oppenheimer. It would be pretty dangerous for the scientists in question, and their ability to be useful would be pretty limited. With a lot of other infrastructure, then yes, they could be useful. This article (if you can find the full version, or this interview with the author) estimates that you'd need a number of trained scientific personnel to assemble a bomb from stolen materials. It would take a few and the key point is that you'd still have to have the fissile materials to begin with. Would missing Soviet scientists be a problem there? Sure, they could be. But the limiting factor is and will always be obtaining fissile materials. If you are going to be worried, worry that Soviet plutonium and enriched uranium is probably not as secured as it could be. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:35, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the question is who they were: first you need to establish the pool of people of interest, then track them. People who know (for example) pit geometry did not sent papers to academic journals. Resurfacing in public (a la Ken Alibek) is quite rare. NVO (talk) 11:07, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to Judaism,no one should work on Sundays.What do they define as "work"? Does the Israeli Army work on Sundays?Adi4094 (talk) 10:21, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The day of rest in Judaism is Saturday, not Sunday - see Shabbat for more information. Gandalf61 (talk) 10:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Pikuach nefesh. I expect the army tries to avoid non-urgent work on the Sabbath, but urgent work required to protect life (which is the main purpose of a standing army) would be allowed. --Tango (talk) 10:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, not everyone in the Israeli Armed Forces is very Orthodox. They might not even all be Jewish religion. Googlemeister (talk) 13:04, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For an ignorant (and disastrous) miscalculation based on similar premises, see Yom Kippur War.--Wetman (talk) 19:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I lived elsewhere for uni one of my flatmates (who had lived for a time in a kibbutz in Israel) said that the only place he could buy cigarettes on a Saturday was the shop on the army base. I don't know if the army base shop was open to everyone on a Saturday, or if it was closed to Jews but he was allowed to shop there on a Saturday because he was quite obviously not Israeli. Joe^Talk_Work 23:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the model in the advertisement of Mamma Mia musical? (The bride)~ Slmking (talk • contribs) 12:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It may be Lisa Stokke, who played the character Sophie (the bride) in the original London cast, and who sings on the soundtrack CD (which also features the same photo). Google Images results for Stokke shows she resembles the ad (more, I think, than Tina Maddigan, who played the same character in the Broadway opening). But I've not found definative evidence; perhaps someone with the CD can check the sleeve notes. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 13:06, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally this would be something I'd expect to see either in the Mamma_Mia! article or the Mamma Mia! Original Cast Recording one, so I've asked at Talk:Mamma_Mia! -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 13:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific about which advertisement you mean?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

S/he probably means this [6]. And I would certainly go along with Mr. McWalter on this one. Caesar's Daddy (talk) 18:41, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a result of the French Revolution a five - person law enforcement body was later establised. OUESTION /? What was its name . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.30.249 (talk) 14:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See French Revolution. Falconus^{p t c} 14:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) There were several such bodies created during the French Revolution by the revolutionary government or arms thereof, some of which worked together and some worked against each other. The most prominent were the nine member Committee of Public Safety, which became something of the de facto executive branch of the revolutionary government, and the similar named Committee of General Security. There was also the Revolutionary Tribunal, which was the de facto judicial court of the revolution. There were likely others, as various factions within the Revolutionary government (the Montagnards, the Girondists, the Jacobins) and at various times each established committees or bodies to do various things in the government. See our articles on French Revolution and the various sub-articles for more info. The Reign of Terror was a very confused time, and at times there was near anarchy in most of France. --Jayron32 14:54, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Homework? TastyCakes (talk) 15:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The answer you're looking for is likely the Directoire.--Xuxl (talk) 19:01, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As part of a project I am working on, I need to gather a lot of research on a particular site, that of the Leca da Palmieras in Portugal, but, so far all I have found are dozens of photos of the area, and as yet have little idea about how it works, access routes, locations of various rooms, and such like, or about the land around it, in particular I would like to have a detailed contour map or the surrounding area.

So, does anyone know anywhere that I can get at this information, for example labelled plans or sections of the site, maps of the area, perhaps even any previous archtectural studies there, but without actually going all the way to Portugal. Anything but more photos of the nice views around there.

148.197.114.207 (talk) 15:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you just been searching on the internet, or have you visited the library of the nearest college with an architecture department and asked the librarian there for books or materials in their architecture collection related to your search? I have found things in a good architecture library which are not found on the internet. The particular things you seek are unlikely to be available (especially free) online. If you are a student there, they should also be able to get materials for you through interlibrary loan. Edison (talk) 16:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked both on the internet and in the library, neither seems to have anything much specific to this one building. Would there be somewhere a complete set of plans, perhaps copies of those used in the actual designing and building, that I could get at? 148.197.114.207 (talk) 16:49, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Start with the spelling Leca da Palmeira.--Wetman (talk) 19:41, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has just a stub article Leça da Palmeira. Wikimapia provides a map and satellite image of the location. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:07, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

which landform (one of the largest of its type in the world) is shown in most maps as dissected by a dashed imaginary line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.88.204 (talk) 16:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this homework question a trick question? I can think of at least two. Livewireo (talk) 16:57, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can think of a river, several lakes, a continent and an island. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:07, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Either a homework question, or more likely a trivia question which the IP probably already knows the answer to. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:05, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A more interesting bit of trivia would be the largest landform bisected by a real dashed line. Inquiring minds want to know! — Lomn 18:37, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Struve Geodetic Arc? Kinda... Fribbler (talk) 18:41, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the answer would be "Africa" which is "dissected" (assuming this means "bisected") by the imaginary equator. But if the OP couldn't figure that out alone, either the answer is not as obvious as that, or kids these days! Adam Bishop (talk) 19:22, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Guinea/Papua New Guinea? --TammyMoet (talk) 19:26, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...or North America, since it's not a question of bisected. Or the Chukchi Sea and the International Date Line. Or...--Wetman (talk) 19:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...or the Pacific Ocean, or whatever... Marco polo (talk) 20:32, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The lines that usually match what is described are usually the lines of latitude known as the Equator, the Arctic Circle, the Antarctic Circle, the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn as well as the longitudinal Greenwich Meridian and the International Date Line. Of these, the that most likely meets the OP's criteria (disecting or bisecting a large landmass) is the Tropic of Capricorn which divides Australia neatly in half. --Jayron32 20:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Landform (continent) Dissected (divided) = Continental Divide; dashed imaginary line = File:NorthAmericaDivides.gif. is my best referenced guess--Preceding unsigned comment 01:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll vote for Greenland and the Artic Circle. DOR (HK) (talk) 02:19, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since the Landform page says oceans count, and the Tropic of Capricorn is often shown as a dashed line, I'm going with the Pacific Ocean. Pfly (talk) 09:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• which landform (one of the largest of its type in the world) is shown in most maps as dissected by a dashed imaginary line?
  • My answer: the continent.
    • Continents are the largest type of landform generally recognized.
    • In most maps, continents are subdivided (not strictly "dissected", since that implies an investigation, but anyway) by political borders. Political borders are often represented on maps by dashed lines -- in particular, that's the most common way of showing sub-national borders. And you don't get much more imaginary than political borders: while some follow physical geography, none are required by physical features alone. They all stem from the human mind, and our social tendency to organize into concepts of ingroup and outgroup. --M@rēino 16:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We are just a bunch of emo hiphop vampires brid...... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.2.183.133 (talk) 19:14, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you a question? --ColinFine (talk) 19:40, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trolling, trolling, trolling, keep them doggies trolling, rawhide! DOR (HK) (talk) 07:07, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Typically a small religious group based in Manipur, INDIA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.2.183.133 (talk) 19:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you a question? --ColinFine (talk) 19:40, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He may be asking about the Meitei people of Manipur, India, quite possibly their religion (see: Meitei_people#Religion). -- 128.104.112.179 (talk) 22:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Like many beginner or less resourced english speakers, the OP may not yet have learnt the quite complex syntax/grammar of how to ask questions in english. Similarly with how to be polite in english. So please be forgiving and helpful. 92.29.118.227 (talk) 11:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which country has the youngest voting age? Are there any countries which allow people to vote who are under 18? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:21, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check Voting age#Voting ages around the world the lowest I can see is 16 - though seems Iran was 15 until 2007. ny156uk (talk) 20:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just heard on the radio this morning that the Shia party in Iraq is holding a primary where they're allowing 15-year-olds to vote, but in the general election, you have to be 18. 99.166.95.142 (talk) 15:47, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is Martin Luther King's wife black or white? For the images we have mrs King is white. Do she have any rlatives which is black, or is she just white?--209.129.85.4 (talk) 20:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coretta Scott King is was most definately a black woman. Being black has little to do with skin tone, and the concept of Race is pretty much bullshit anyways. She comes from black american culture, other people respond responded to her as though she is a black woman, and she self identifies self-identified as black. Counting up her "white" ancestors, should it be found one way or the other if she indeed had some, would have zero bearing on whether or not she should be considered black. --Jayron32 20:32, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with Jayron's comments but would point out that Mrs. King, sadly, has passed away, so any discussion of her should be in the past tense. Marco polo (talk) 20:35, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So noted and corrected. --Jayron32 20:45, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• To offer a little more explanation: the reason why many African-Americans are much lighter-skinned than the average, um, African-African, is that during the History of slavery in the United States it was fairly common for white male slave-owners or overseers to have sex with black female slaves. It's not exactly what we'd call sexual slavery today, but it certainly wasn't consensual, since after all these women were slaves. Of course, there were also a lot of "black" people who were the product of perfectly happy interracial marriages, too, but children of legitimate relationships like that are fairly likely to self-identify as mulatto or biracial, whereas children of white-slave relations were almost always considered blacks, and slaves, in the eyes of society and the law (there was even a legal latin term for it:Partus sequitur ventrem). --M@rēino 16:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From this site said black man to go together with white women is 2.65 time slikely than white man to go together with white women, but they didn't say what happen in 2007. I live in the south central side of orange county, let's just say south of irvine, and my whole life I've never found any white man marry black women. The articles OP last time link is people born in the 1910s, and 1930s and marry like around the 1940s. These is obviously obsolete. Those guys they gave me is at least in the 70s right now, some is decease. I'm wondering about the 2008 consensus of black/white intermarriage.--209.129.85.4 (talk) 20:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what question you are trying to ask. Can you please ask your question more clearly? Marco polo (talk) 20:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict with Marco Polo)Of course, you are a sample size of 1, and you your personal experiences would have little bearing on actual occurrances. You asked this same question two weeks ago: [7] and you got a series of responses which clearly showed that your personal experience could not really be translated to a greater statement of truth. People came up with half a dozen examples of celebrities that matched the black wife/white husband pattern; if we were to count up non-famous people you would likely find many many many many more. Being located in a small part of one county in one metropolitan area does not mean that because you have never experienced it; that it doesn't exist. In my small high school in New Hampshire I had two biracial classmates; one had a black mother and a white father, the other the other way around. But I would never attempt to make any broad statements about statistics in this area from my small experience. --Jayron32 20:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How come the Chinese don't have a concept similar to the Japanese gaijin and the Korean weiguk? Or do they? --80.123.210.172 (talk) 21:21, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course they do. That both those terms are etymologically Sino-Japanese/Sino-Korean should give you a clue.

The formal term for foreigners - depending on context, with many of the same connotations as "gaijin" - is waiguoren 外国人. Notice that the same characters are used in gaijin/weiguk. Colloquially, you will find parallels in the Cantonese Gweilo, and the northern Chinese Laowai. Those articles may be helpful. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because of size of China and its history, Chinese people has always been rather hetrogenous in languages and cultures among its people. The Japanese sense of "in" and "out" groups are unheard of. --Chan Tai Man 21:46, 14 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chantaiman (talk • contribs)

The concepts of ingroup and outgroup are universals of human psychology, found in every culture in the world. -- BenRG (talk) 22:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True, however it's fair to say that some cultures are more accepting of outsiders or define their ingroup more loosely. Among cultures of large societies, Japanese culture defines its ingroup relatively strictly and is relatively closed to outsiders. My sense is that this is less true of China, particularly in coastal cities. I don't know enough about Korea to compare it. Marco polo (talk) 22:59, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm white European and I live in Melbourne Australia which is a very multicultural city. I have both Chinese and Japanese friends and both gaijin and gweilo are terms we frequently use in jest. Two other jokular terms I like are banana and egg, a banana is a yellow person who is really white on the inside and an egg is a white person who's yellow in the middle. Of course you have to be a little careful you don't offend anyone, but generally most people here anyway are pretty hip, probably because it is such a mixing pot, you wouldn't get far if you were really racist. Vespine (talk) 23:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How did they take to the Jackson Jive sketch? --71.111.194.50 (talk) 12:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can tell you that you must renounce your citizenship to become a citizen of China, so it seems they (at least the government officials) aren't all that comfortable with cosmopolitanism. Vranak (talk) 23:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just like the US then. Johnbod (talk) 01:22, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really? If that were the case, then how do you explain the birthers trying to claim that Obama has both US and Kenyan/British citizenship? Winston Churchill had both US and UK citizenship. Are you really trying to claim that there is no such thing as an American citizen with dual or multiple citizenship? 99.166.95.142 (talk) 15:44, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Cantonese Gweilo (ghost/spirit – elder / honorific) is not the same as the Putonghua (Mandarin) Laowai (elder/honorific-foreign /outsider), and generally is considered to be much more derogatory than Laowai. More along the lines of Da Bizi (big-nose). DOR (HK) (talk) 02:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on context and location. Here (in Australia), gweilo is most often the colloquial term for "white person", or, depending on the context, Anglo-Saxon white person; sometimes used jocularly but usually neutrally (and not pejoratively) - and is used in most dialects of Chinese, not just Cantonese.

I confess I've never heard Da Bizi used in real life - is it a northern Chinese thing? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:54, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's more of an old thing. Although Chinese still joke about the big noses of foreigners, Da Bizi is generally only a nickname used by people who have it as an inside joke. In Shanghai 'laowai' is the most common, followed by the more literal 'waiguoren'. Steewi (talk) 03:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I live in NE China and not a week goes by that a young child walking with their parent(s) doesn't point at me and exclaim in surprise "waiguoren!" ... I always immediately point right back and exclaim with the same surprise "zhongguoren!" (Chinese person!) ... that usually puts their reality through a blender. 218.25.32.210 (talk) 06:39, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did that too. It was totally worth it for the stunned look on their faces, and the insane giggling that eventually followed. Steewi (talk) 23:27, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PalaceGuard008, every single time I've heard someone say "Gweilo is only offensive in a certain context," or something like that, the situation is an ethnic Chinese person "correcting" a (usually) White person. In other words, what Chinese might think is not too offensive may well be very offensive to non-Chinese.

218.25, Steewi, I had exactly the same situation, and response, in Taiwan some 30 years ago. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Correspondent: Pay Taliban $20 a day not to fight By David Edwards and Daniel Tencer Monday, October 12th, 2009 -- 8:59 am

Could Israel pay Palestinians not to fight? 71.100.5.245 (talk) 21:28, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This concept was discussed in Vietnam too. It didn't work there either. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 22:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Israel is not really fighting a war against tens of thousands of soldiers. It's fighting terrorists, who are fewer in number but more committed to their cause, whatever that is. Terrorists are often from middle-class families. One may join an army for the money, but one becomes a suicide bomber only because of fierce ideological or religious devotion. It's worth noting that the Palestinians receive more foreign aid per capita than any other entity in the world (or at least they did before Iraq and Afghanistan became part of the U.S. budget) -- and the Israelis get lots of money from the U.S. -- but this has not convinced them to stop fighting. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that along with the 72 virgins Muslims are promised their families will receive a ton of cash. Maybe this is just in Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and other predominantly Muslim countries but if applicable to Palestinians it would seem like cash might work. Just compensation perhaps (versus bribe) for Jewish people (re)-claiming the historic father/mother land by force. 71.100.5.245 (talk) 00:23, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm distressed at the lack of references we are giving our OP. Please provide references when you give answers. Further, you're way oversimplifying. This link, for example, the 2nd Google hit on "terrorist recruitment", quotes some think tank guy as saying: Among Somali Americans, the refugee experience of fleeing a war-torn country combined with isolation, perceived discrimination, marginalization and frustrated expectations as well as local, criminal, familial and clan dynamics, make some members of this community more susceptible to this sort of extremist influence.

Bugs may be referring to the "Barcalounger" column by Cecil Adams who in 1991 explored paying off the Viet Cong instead of fighting them. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mwalcoff is absolutely correct -- Muslims cannot be paid to restrain themselves unless it's on their terms, and as the wages likely won't be set by an Islamic court of religious law, the odds of it working out are virtually none. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 23:05, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that offering them a bribe would only make them angrier and more determined. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's almost impossible to bribe a whole people into accepting the conquest of their land. Not by giving them something like $20 anyway - perhaps if you institute a democratic system of fair and efficient government, give them indoor plumbing, roads, amphitheatres, gladiators, the alphabet and magnificent baths... maybe then.

Their land? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 02:26, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the catalyst for recruiting terrorists it monetary, but the root cause that drives people to become terrorists almost certainly aren't. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh boy. Err... thanks for breaking up my post... I'm not getting into that one. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 12:33, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Palestinian National Charter asserts that "Jewish claims of historic ties to Palestine are inconsistent with the facts of history and what constitutes statehood" -- completely ignoring that prior to usurping the title, "Palestinian" referred to Jews of the land. The Palestine Regiment of the British Mandate was composed of Jews. The Palestinian Talmud referred to that Oral Law canonized in the Land of Israel, as opposed to that which was codified in modern-day Iraq, which is called the Babylonian Talmud. It's because people don't want to get into that that such widespread revisionist history propaganda is disseminated so easily. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 20:08, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Giving aid in a conflict zone needs to be done very carefully. If they get money because they are fighting then in effect they are paid to fight and that is what they will do. Dmcq (talk) 23:25, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The strategy was used by the US more or less effectively in Iraq (see Awakening movements), but context is incredibly important. For example the Sunni militia had more reason than money to side with the US forces: they were fighting some common enemies. They were also less purely driven by ideology than real terrorist organizations.

I think giving people economic opportunities can help stem terrorist recruiting, so maybe Israel would be well served by spending more money on development and improving quality of life for Palestinians, but that's another issue. Rckrone (talk) 23:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A quick search on /terrorists middle class/ found this interesting paper on the relationship between poverty, education and support for terrorism or participation in terrorist activities in the Middle East. Interesting factoids: Poor Lebanese are less likely to become Hezbollah fighters than non-poor Lebanese. Better-educated Lebanese are more likely to become Hezbollah fighters than less-educated Lebanese. Poor Palestinians are less likely to become suicide bombers than non-poor Palestinians. Suicide bombers are better-educated than the average Palestinian. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those sound like very scary statistics so I wonder if there is something else going on here. What possible differences in thinking could render such results? 71.100.5.245 (talk) 17:02, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can pay a lot of cash to "buy" the loyalty of an enemy military leader and make him surrender. It may work (or not: honor and pride, in culture-specific forms, are usually highly regarded among military people, and this kind of deal would be considered treason at any army), but even if it does, subordinates are likely to riot against their masters and choose other leaders, even more radical than those. MBelgrano (talk) 18:23, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is key. Afghanistan is a tribal society, you don't have to pay off every member of a certain tribe, you just have to get their leader "on board". Doing that may include a number of things, direct financial support among them. TastyCakes (talk) 19:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is to keep him on board. Not so trustworthy from the looks of things. Googlemeister (talk) 20:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is like the unsuccessful Land for peace formula without the Land. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's because the Land for peace formula didn't take into consideration the root of the specific Palestinian (and general Islamic) attitude towards Jews. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 02:40, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure there is a general Islamic attitude towards the Jews. Islam is a diverse faith, and I don't think there is anything inherent in Islam that makes the Israeli-Palistinian situation intractable on religious grounds. The situation is intractable for purely political reasons. The state of Isreal was established because the Jewish nation was a stateless people, and needed/desired a state to become full participants in the international world. The lack of a national homeland was one of the root causes of the sort of Anti-semitism that led to the Holocaust. The problem is that the land on which they established their national state, kinda already had people living on it. The intractable nature of the problem is a) The Jewish People needed a national homeland b) The Palestinian people who were already living there have rights too. This is a prickly issue because both sides have a point in the issue, and it requires one side or the other to give up something of which they have every right to keep, but are willing to give it up anyways, in order to be resolved. That is the intractable nature of it; neither side is particularly wrong on the basic premise of their positions. Where one side or the other goes wrong is in the actions they take to defend their position. --Jayron32 03:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It appears as though you are reciting the common rhetoric that has been promulgated by the media over the last few decades, and in concert with WP:AGF and my general perception of your quality as an editor, I do not put any blame on you for failing to uncover the aforementioned ruse. The media will have you believe that the issue is a political one based on what is commonly known as "the occupation" of the Shomron...Judea and Samaria, commonly referred to in modern parlance as the West Bank, the Golan Heights, Gaza. If only Israel would withdraw and end the occupation, everything would be wonderful. In reality, though, such a resolution (and unfortnately, all peace processes to date focus on this) would only solve the issue if, in fact, the occupation that began following the 1967 Six Day War was the cause of such tension. But the Six Day War was a pre-emptive strike against the act of war committed by Iran (blockade of international waterway, such as the Straights of Tehran, is an act of war) taht resulted in Israel taking control of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Sinai Peninsula, the Golan Heights and the Gaza Strip. We had this war before an occupation existed -- Egypt and Syria created the United Arab Republic with the overtly declared intent to destroy the State of Israel. It cannot be, then that the cause of something (occupation) happens after its effect (Arab hatred) -- this is sort of what's not clear to the majority of the world's population.

So then some say it was not 1967, but 1948, that caused a rift. That does not explain why there were riots in Tel Aviv-Jaffa in 1921 or pogroms/riots in 1929 in Hebron -- the source of the hatred must therefor go back further than that. One could claim that it began in the late 1800's when the Zionist movement began and thousands upon thousands of Jews began emigrating to the region. But if one looks at population levels at the time, they reflect that the more the Jewish population increased, the more the Muslim population increased. That's because, prior to the Jews moving there, there was little to no agriculture, industry, science and modern medicine, modern education, commerce, bringing that area into the 20th century.

But Jews were discriminated against even prior to that. Jews who lived in Muslim countries were called dhimmis -- second class citizens who were forced to pay jizya-tribute in order to practice their reliigous views -- based on sura 3 in the Koran, that those who do not believe in Allah must "grab a rope from Allah and a rope from man." (Islamic Anti-Semitism, Why the Jews, Telushkin + Praeger) Jews are not allowed to have independent rule, and this cannot have anything to do with the establishment of the State of Israel, which came many, many years later. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 19:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be interested in reading a bit of serious sociological (or management?) research into the reluctance (or so it has often seemed to me) of people (I'll call them X) making personnel decisions to employ people (Y) who could well be seen, or could justifiably see themselves, as distinctly better qualified or more competent than themselves (X). (Sorry for the syntactic/stylistic ineptitude, but I've only just woken up.) Any authors, key terms, or other pointers for me? -- Hoary (talk) 23:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm understanding your question correctly, the common term is "hiring your replacement": hiring a subordinate who is qualified to do your own job. I don't know if researchers use a different term or not. --Carnildo (talk) 00:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the try, but no, not quite. Let's suppose that a high school in an English-speaking country has classes in German and that one of the four teachers of German is due to retire. The school advertises for an additional teacher and the three or four teachers of German are charged with the choice among the applicants. None of the four, and none of the applicants, is a native speaker of German. The four know that they have, and suspect that the applicants have, varying degrees of pedagogic skill. Two of the four often stumble when attempting to converse in German and even the better two have pronunciation that would immediately sound odd (or charming) to native ears. Their own academic backgrounds are less than stellar. The applicants all have relevant masters degrees from English-language countries, but one applicant also has a doctorate from Germany. My hunch is that this one applicant will make some of the current teachers feel distinctly queasy. They certainly won't say "He'd show me/us up as relatively incompetent in German" and they may not even think it; but they'd find other hints in the CV to support worries that he "might not fit in", a notion that could gain agreement with remarkable speed. (This would be in addition to the openly expressible notion that he's overqualified and thus might get a job at a university, in industry, or in a better school after an annoyingly short time. Although of course it could be expressed as this.) ¶ I freely admit that I don't know what I'm talking about; I merely have anecdotal evidence and would like to edjicate myself. (Oh, and my German is virtually non-existent.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:48, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the chapter on "Injelititis" in Parkinson's Law. Unlike some of Professor C. Northcote Parkinson's other phrases, neither "Injelititis" nor "Injelitance" (Incompetence plus Jealousy) became part of common discourse, but some of the ideas come close to what you're describing. For example,

The injelitant individual is easily recognizable at this stage from the persistence with which he struggles to eject all those abler than himself, as also from his resistance to the appointment or promotion of anyone who might prove abler in course of time. He dare not say, 'Mr Asterisk is too able,' so he says, 'Asterisk? Clever, perhaps—but is he sound? I incline to prefer Mr Cypher.' He dare not say, 'Mr Asterisk makes me feel small,' so he says, 'Mr Cypher appears to me to have the better judgement.'
— p. 95 of the John Murray edition (London, 1958); p. 81 (Chapter 8) of the Houghton Mifflin Sentry edition (Boston, 1957).
—— Shakescene (talk) 06:33, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Hah! That's pretty good. Of course it's insufficiently nuanced and doesn't even purport to be scientific, but at least it gives me a search term or two. Thank you. -- Hoary (talk) 06:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't call this 'fear of one's betters' -- it's more along the lines of self-preservation. I mean, how critical will it be if your company could be running 8% more efficiently, if you don't even have a job there? Vranak (talk) 13:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You wouldn't be too likely to lose your job in that situation, just be less likely to get promoted. It's just selfishness, really - people do what will benefit them, rather than the company, and I guess you can't really blame them. --Tango (talk) 14:14, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If John the upper manager doesn't do what's in John the upper manager's best interest, no one else will! So good on him for protecting his interests. I don't want him to lose his wife and kids and more than he does! Vranak (talk) 15:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean might is right? That's fascism. 78.151.123.102 (talk) 20:02, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If John the upper manager is in a position to hire or to not hire certain people, then yes, his 'might makes right', you could say. You could also say that a company has no place for people who don't fit in. That means people who are too smart, who have too much integrity, and so on. The idea that people of merit deserve any job they apply to is pure lunacy. Companies want warm bodies, not supple minds. Vranak (talk) 20:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not necessarily a zero-sum game. One can try to do what is in the interest of the greater good while still endeavoring to protect one's own interests. Of course this is unlikely, in practice. Bus stop (talk) 21:14, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It could be called "fear of one's fears," because it can take on a wide variety of forms, all of which involve fear of that which one is personally insecure about. A superior may not like you for non job related reasons. Bus stop (talk) 14:26, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The minimisation of personal jealousy as a powerful rule of behaviour and evaluation of others is something that occurs in many/most walks of life, particularly in people who have not learnt to behave with professionalism. Including educational settings. This rule seems to be a fundamental part of machismo and/or working-class culture (and a maladaption as using it does not make things better). A number of writers have commented on working-class people being very sensitive to the slightest suggestion of "superiority" of the subject, which comes to the same thing. Rather than the theorectical ideal of evaluating people entirely on their objective merits, it is the inverse of jealousy that is measured, including how loyal to the assessor and their culture the subject will be. Not sure what it would be referred to as in research literature - ego defense? Cognitive dissonance as applied to the self? There are also lists of biases somewhere on Wikipedia and many of them may apply to this situation. I've never heard of anyone researching the sociology or psychology of jealousy, but it would be very interesting. 78.151.123.102 (talk) 20:02, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aristophobia?--Wetman (talk) 20:43, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2 question:

Did the Kingdom of Tahiti in the early 19th century had queen consorts?

Who is the current pretender (recognized or unrecognized) to the Pomare dynasty of Tahiti? --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 01:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Queen_of_Tahiti has the answer to number two (see the bottom of the article). Falconus^{p t c} 02:19, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For number one, I think it's a yes, sort of. The impression I've been getting from reading about this era is that both the title of king of Tahiti and the ascribing of the ultimate authority to the husband rather than the wife may have been European views imposed on top of a different Tahitian social structure. There were several chiefs, no one supreme, and both husband and wife in such a "royal" couple seemed to have power of negotiating relations and making decisions.

Anyway, you need a good history of Tahiti, but for starters online have a look at Tahiti: The Island Paradise, by Nicholas Senn (BiblioBazaar, 2008 – but a reprint of an older book), ISBN 9780559279393. On page 61-63 it gives Tetua as the name of one of Pomare I's (to 1803) wives, and possibly the person responsible for his influence. (The wikipedia page says he had four wives).

Page 67 gives Tetuanui as the first wife of Pomare II (1803-1821); page 78 mentions another wife called Terite and a third with no given name described simply as Pomare vehine. And page 81 mentions another wife, referred to Marama – although as that was her father's name it might not actually have been her own name.

Pomare III (1821-1827) died at age seven. He was succeeded by his sister Pomare IV who reigned to 1877, which takes you out of the early 19th century. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 14:12, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, on a related note, does anyone know where I can find a state department budget more detailed than simply the "budget in brief" presented on their website? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.214.112 (talk) 12:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could try reading the Congressional Record, since the budget will have been approved by Congress, or the Federal Register, because I believe that all executive departments publish reports in it. However, I've never used either one (except for small PDF excerpts that I found with Google), so I can't help you search through it. Nyttend (talk) 21:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have any Jewish people blown themselves up to kill a bunch of Muslims? 71.100.5.245 (talk) 17:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Jewish religious terrorism and Zionist political violence. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:13, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Zionist terrorists were actually the first to start using car bombing in the Middle East (see Stern gang), against both Palestinians and British civilians. Only later were the tactics taken up by Palestinians.* Many of the terrorist tactics we have come to associate with Muslim terrorists originated elsewhere. Palestinian suicide bombing comes most directly, if I recall, from the example set by the Tamil tigers. (A very interesting read on this subject is Mike Davis, Buda's Wagon: A Brief History of the Car Bomb, 2007). --Mr.98 (talk) 18:07, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*Which, I think should be obvious to any clear-thinking person, does not make it right or fair or anything like that. But it does serve as a counterpoint to those who believe there is some kind of Muslim exceptionalism regarding this kind of terrorism. There have been a lot of different groups engaging in terrorism in the 20th century. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:11, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While not actually blowing himself up, Baruch Goldstein himself could hardly have expected to survive the massacre he planned, so it counts as suicidal terrorism. --Saddhiyama (talk) 18:32, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An exceptionally prominent Jew gave expressed approval ^{Joh 15:13} of sacrificing one's life for a cause. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But he was not speaking on behalf of Judaism -- thus his assertion can no more represent Judaism as it could people who wore sandals or those who had long hair. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 02:30, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He might beg to differ. He was Jewish and claimed to be the Messiah and/or was claimed to be by His followers, who were also Jewish. He was dispatched, as a number of contemporary Messiah claimants were. The difference was that His following did not die with Him. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 07:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But he was rejected by the Jews. In Judaism, he is a false prophet and his message thus cannot be said to be representative of Judaism. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 20:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin. See the article INRI. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:12, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, for sacrifing one's own life, but not others. Unless He made oxcart bombs in His spare time. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:16, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He wasn't exactly Jewish, but consider the life of Samson: he died by intentionally pulling down over his head a Philistine temple that was full of Philistines (enemies of Israel). The biblical account notes that he proclaimed that he wanted to die with the Philistines, and it records that he was quite successful in his attempt, killing more Philistines in that event than in all the rest of his life. The polytheistic Philistines weren't Muslims, of course, but this might be an inspiration to militant Jews. Nyttend (talk) 02:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A bit off-topic, but what tense should be used with Biblical narratives? Esther is in the past (i.e. historical) tense, Book of Job is in the present (fictional), while Samson blithely switches back and forth in the first paragraph! Clarityfiend (talk) 07:20, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would think that question has been discussed at length among the editors who specialize in Bible articles, so you might want to seek out that discussion. The O.T., in particular, gets tricky, because a lot of it walks the line between history and folk tales. Also, keep in mind that the Bible (as with the Quran) are primary sources, so restating them "as if they were true" is also tricky ground. Seems like it would be safer to treat them as literature, in which case describing their "plot lines" in the present tense works, and also reads better. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 07:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The subject heading says "Israeli terrorists" but the question asks "Have any Jewish people blown themselves up to kill a bunch of Muslims". While definitions of terrorism vary, many don't require the perpetrator sacrifice their lives. And not all Israelis are Jewish nor are all Jewish people Israeli. Moses is sometimes called a terrorist for this reason. However the bible would suggest Moses was perhaps more of a messenger or spokesperson for God. So in those terms, it's perhaps better to say God is a terrorist and there are many actions in the Old Testament/Tanakh which some people particularly some atheists would argue are terrorist acts. (this mentions Moses as well) [8] [9] Of course whether God can be considered an Israeli or Jewish is a different issue. Nil Einne (talk) 10:40, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which place has an old structure (now a museum) that was the site of the absolute first utilization of a now well-used natural resource. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.95.8 (talk) 17:26, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do your own homework.

Welcome to the Wikipedia Reference Desk. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation, but it is our aim here not to do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn nearly as much as doing it yourself. Please attempt to solve the problem or answer the question yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:38, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems rather obscure for homework. It sounds more like a pub quiz question or something. --Tango (talk) 17:47, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a home work question. I have tried it myself to research. Hence sought help.

Basically i am looking for places where the mostly used natural resources like coal oil gas were first used. will apprecaite help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.95.8 (talk) 17:54, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The way you initially framed the question sounded like you either already knew the answer or you were repeating a specific question given to you by someone else. Do you have a specific location that you were looking for in mind that you simply cannot come up with the specific name, or are you looking for examples of anywhere that would fit the description?

Coal has been used for thousands of years, and I greatly doubt that the location of the "absolute first utilization" is known, let alone still standing as a museum (See Coal and History of coal mining).

I think the same situation is true for oil as well - see Petroleum, Petroleum industry, and History of petroleum. —Akrabbim^talk 18:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first building to be lit by gas was William Murdock's house in Redruth - this might very well be a museum today, but we don't have an article on it. The first non-private building to be lit by gas was the Soho Foundry in Birmingham - this is still a working factory, but it does have a small private museum attached to it. The first building to be lit by electricity was Joseph Swan's house in Low Fell - probably _not_ a museum, based on our article. Tevildo (talk) 19:17, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I think I have a definite answer. The Museum of Science and Industry, Birmingham was the first place that electricity was used commercially (for electroplating). However, it closed in 1997 and is now derelict. Tevildo (talk) 19:26, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd question the certainty of this claim of precedence. Artifacts known as the Baghdad Batteries, excavated in the vicinity of that city and thought to be approaching two millennia old, have been interpreted as primitive electric cells putatively used to electroplate gold on to jewellery or similar small items. This would presumably have been a commercial application. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 23:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The answer may be Cragside, which is considered the first place of use of domestic electric lighting. It also used hydraulic power. 78.151.123.102 (talk) 19:32, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A question about "places where natural resources were first used" is welcome because it is notable information on which an encyclopedia may help. The OP's added constraints that there must be a structure at the place and the structure must now be a museum make one wonder Why is that important? Does the museum have to be open to viewing exhibits about the resource? Is this research to collate places or museums? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:22, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if this is what you are after, as it's a bit obscure, but the Gobelins Manufactory, a seventeenth century tapestry factory in Paris, now largely preserved for tours, was the first place to use chlorine - in 1785, as a dye. Warofdreams talk 01:39, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would have guessed the rackets courts at University of Chicago but it appears not to have a museum. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 15:18, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's understood Francine Hughes was found not guilty by reason of temporary insanity for setting fire to her abusive husband, James "Mickey" Hughes, while he slept in 1977. I know Tracey Thurman is partially paralized from when she was nearly killed by her abusive husband, Charles "Buck" Thurman in 1983. I was wondering what those two women and their children are doing nowadays. Is Buck Thurman back in jail?24.90.204.234 (talk) 20:37, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reading this story from the Signpost, I was confused about the IOC's grounds for the lawsuit. Are they saying that it's somehow a violation of copyright laws to buy an Olympic ticket, take a picture there, and permit the picture to be used commercially? Or is it some other crazy matter? Nyttend (talk) 22:01, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they say that when you buy a ticket, you agree to the smallprint associated with it, which includes the no-commercial-photography stipulation. They (and other big-money sports events) also restrict commercial video, and real-time (or real-time-ish) live-blogging of events. The practical legality of this (whether such a contract stipulation is really legal) is untested in most jurisdictions, but that's one of those pay-$10M-to-find-out-in-court questions. 87.114.150.241 (talk) 22:07, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) My understanding is that an Olympics event, like many musical, artistic, cultural and sporting events, place controls on the intellectual property derived from the "performance" at the event by tacking conditions onto the patron's entry.

This is how it works normally: when you buy a ticket to enter a venue, you are being granted a licence to enter the land (venue). This licence can be granted on certain terms. These terms can be incorporated by reference and, for example, printed on your ticket. (Hence the reference to the ticket.)

These conditions are contractual in nature: you hand over money and promise to abide by these rules, and in return the owner of the land grants you a licence to enter upon the land.

Presumably one of the conditions of entry to the venue is that the patron will not make commercial use of, or permit the commercial use of, photos of competitors taken at the event.

Alternatively, it may stipulate that you agree to assign the intellectual property in your photos to the IOC, who then grants a licence back to you to use it for non-commercial purposes, though I don't think this is the case here, since the article seems to refer to the photographer granting licences.

Assuming the first case, then, if you then allow the photo to be used commercially, you have, on the face of it, breached a term of the contract between you and the IOC (?) formed when you bought a ticket to the event. Note that this would not be a question of infringement of copyright, but merely a contractual matter. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:12, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking a sports event is not a "performance"—it does not exist in "fixed form" other than the copyrighted works made from it (recordings, photographs, etc.) which is in the US case anyway required for something to be copyrightable (if sports were scripted, it would be something else... WWE, for example, probably falls into a different category than the Olympics).

To me, it looks like this is a contractual issue and not a copyright one, looking at the IOC's specific requests. Presumably if you had somehow gotten in without a ticket, it wouldn't be an issue. (You'd be breaking other rules, but not copyright.) Copyright seems to be the mechanism of control here, but not the underlying issue of dispute. But I'm no lawyer. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's really no different from going to the theater, discretely taking a few shots of some hot production, and then trying to sell them. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:14, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...actually, yes it is quite different. "Dramatic performances" are specially covered by copyright law. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The two are quite different in nature. A sporting event is not an artistic work or (arguably) a performance. However, in some jusridictions performers face the same issue in preventing recording of the performance as the IOC would face in preventing recording of the sporting event from an intellectual property standpoint - hence why the prohibition on photography is often also enforced contractually as a condition of entry instead.

The issue here is copyright, but not the IOC's copyright - it's the photographer's copyright and how he has licensed its use. The IOC probably has no copyright in the images, and only has a contractual claim. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the issue here is contract law; the IOC is not claiming that their copyright was violated, rather that the person who took and licenced the picture for commercial use violated the contact they entered into when they purchased the ticket. This isn't about intellectual property; its about violating a contract. --Jayron32 03:03, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the way the contract was breached was through the (allegedly) inappropriate licensing of the images. IP is an issue, though the claim is contractual in nature. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 03:52, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right... again, I think the issue is contractual, but IP is being used as the mechanism of control. The contract says, "you handle your IP in a certain way"—it's not a straight IP problem though (which would not be a contract so much as a statement—"we own the IP on this"—which they can't do in this case, I don't think). --Mr.98 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]

i was at target and there were people with these i heart hookers t shirts advocating for more prostitution or something yelling, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HELP SUPPORT ABUSED PROSTITUTES? i was quite confused and a bit curious and appaled, are they for real? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.103.253 (talk) 00:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Helping abused prostitutes =/= advocating for more prostitution. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk)

See Sex workers' rights. Here's an external link. Marco polo (talk) 01:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I found a website that is it hookers escorts and masseurs, but my question is, is this organization for real? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.103.253 (talk) 01:33, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At Target??? →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 03:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not uncommon in the US for political groups seeking signatures for various political measures to congregate in front of stores like Target, Costco, etc. (Or at least it wasn't when I was in California—I have to admit I haven't seen it in Massachusetts yet—there may be some ordinance banning that kind of activity, or maybe it is just less referendum-happy.) The theory is that if you put up a signing sheet for some political cause in a high-traffic area (and do this at multiple places across the state), you'll quickly be able to get the 20,000 or whatever signatures you need to introduce a referendum or whatever. The stores in front of which these are posted do not have any affiliation or connection with the group, usually. --Mr.98 (talk) 16:36, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From a quick glance, I don't see any reason to suspect that organisation is not real. As has been mentioned, there are definitely organisations which advocate for sex workers' rights and welfare. In New Zealand where prostitution is largely legal since 2003 there exists a Prostitutes Collective in existence since 1987 http://www.nzpc.org.nz/ http://www.nzpc.org.nz/page.php?page_name=About%20Us who are definitely real. As has been mentioned these organisations don't necessarily advocate for more prostitution although they may not share your apparent stigma to sex work. Nil Einne (talk) 11:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well you Geolocate to California, which is wonderfully progressive about all sorts of social issues. Most likely they were trying to raise awareness for sex worker abuse, as linked above by another poster. As to their methods, you are the only witness and we can pass no judgment. 218.25.32.210 (talk) 05:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested in COYOTE. 99.166.95.142 (talk) 15:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've run across a manuscript document from Indiana from 70 years ago in which a man named John frequently writes his name as "Jno." He occasionally will use "John", so I know that I have the name correct, but I've never seen such an abbreviation. Is this at all a common abbreviation? Or is this guy perhaps dyslexic? Nyttend (talk) 02:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not dyslexic. Jno. used to be an abbreviation for John. Consider John Witherspoon, signer of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, who signed his name clearly as "Jno Witherspoon". --Jayron32 03:00, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "o" was usually a superscript, i.e. Jn^o. See, for example, John Harvie's signature here. Other abbreviations used by signers of the Declaration include Rob^t, Sam^l, W^m, Tho^s, and Ja^s, all very common at the time. The inverted letter order of Jn^o does seem a bit strange in comparison, but it too was standard. —Kevin Myers 03:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My favorite of those style was Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, who abbreviated his rather odd first name as "Dan^l of S^t Tho^s", which used the superscript three times in one name. --Jayron32 03:33, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointers; I've never observed "Jno" before. I've run across the superscript idea in other, older, documents (if you look in the Language archives, you can find me asking questions about early nineteenth-century spelling in southern Pennsylvania, regarding one of these documents) in many forms. As these are church meeting minutes, I often found both M^r and Rev^d being used, as well as a Samuel whose name is spelled Sam^l. This Indiana document is different, however: it contains records from 1918 to 1938; the superscript is not used. Was this abbreviation still in common use into the 1930s? I'll not be surprised if it's simply that this guy is unusual; he consistently spells "minutes" (i.e. the meeting minutes) as "minuet" or "minuets" (e.g. "The minuet of the last meeting were read..."), for a reason I've not discovered. Nyttend (talk) 03:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Google Books tells me that in the New York Times Index of 1922, the abbreviation "Jno" was used 100 times. So it was still around, though I imagine it was getting a little musty by then. —Kevin Myers 04:18, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to Google and enter ["jno" abbreviation] you will see this same question asked many times, going back a number of years. The reason for the usage seems to be lost in antiquity. One theory is that it was somehow to distinguish "John" from "Jonathan". Another is that the superscript "o" is actually a fancified period. The John Harvie signature linked earlier would seem to challenge that, as he had a period... under what looks like a double oo (though it could just be a fancified swirl), thus adding a layer to this little mystery. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 05:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This PDF posted by BYU [10] lists a lot of the abbreviations used for names. They say John could be abbreviated "Jn" or "Jno" and that Jonathan was abbreviated "Jnthn". →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 05:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In a book on the history of mirrors, I read a passing reference to John Dee's investigations into the colours of angels, but can find no other mention of it on the Net - can anyone point me to it, please? Thanks Adambrowne666 (talk) 10:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We have John Dee ... deals with his angel summoning activities. One can imaging the angels, sitting in heaven, thinking "buzz off, barking mad person, I'm not playing your game". --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:14, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although rather a dubious work, this book appears to accurately reproduce Dee's musings on the subject. Warofdreams talk 11:19, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note that a good deal of John Dee's original (manuscript) writings are preserved and available for study in the British Library, but have never been published in printed or facsimile form: in principle you could consult them directly. I learned this a couple of years ago in a lecture/demonstration on Enochian magick given by someone researching that subject. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 21:11, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for these - sadly (for many reasons) i'm not in the UK, so can't visit the British Library. The book I read mentioned he went to especial pains to discover angels' colours - does anyone know what specifically he did to find these colours, or did he just ask the angels in person? Adambrowne666 (talk) 03:02, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article with the above URL, "Papier-mâché Tiara," seems to be missing an important reference citation to a primary source document. I copy the middle paragraph under the section "Continuing usage": "A new silver papal tiara to replace the destroyed ones was only manufactured in 1820, but the papier-mâché tiara continued in usage for decades afterwards, its lightweight design making it a comfortable alternative to the heavier silver alternative for popes as they aged. It was finally officially retired from usage in 1845, when a new lightweight tiara was manufactured for Pope Gregory XVI. Contemporary reports suggested that Pope Gregory viewed it as demeaning that the Vicar of Christ should be seen wearing a crown made not from gold or silver but from mere crushed paper."

It seems that the author omitted reference to a primary source which must have mentioned the existence of the lightweight tiara manufactured for Gregory XVI in 1845. I have done a tremendous amount of checking this out, with the aid of the Google search engine. I found no references at all to this 1845 tiara, outside the Wikipedia article itself. The lone reference: Lord Twining, A History of the Crown Jewels of Europe, 1960, seems to be related to another part of this article. Still, I thought it might be the hoped-for primary source, so I had a reference librarian go through it. She was kind enough to supply PDFs of the key pages referring to papal tiaras, but there is not a whisper about this 1845 lightweight tiara.

In conclusion, it would be thrilling to resolve this matter, if you can obtain from the article's author either a true reference to the tiara in question or a restatement of the sentence in which the claim appears. Either of these options assumes that there is no typographical error with respect to the year 1845 or that the statement as given contains a factual error.

Elbuckoaqui (talk) 17:28, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Elbuckoaqui, welcome to Wikipedia and kudos on doing all that research and checking. I hope you stay and continue to contribute in this way. Looking in the article's history (click the "history" tab at the top of the page), it says that the creator of the article is User:Jtdirl. The way to ask them about their source is to go to their talk page User talk:Jtdirl, and edit the page to leave them a message. They can respond either under your message or on your own talk page, and hopefully you can get that resolution. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 19:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can anybody recommend some good academic or otherwise authoritative sources on the subject? Our current sources on the subject are vaguely appalling for their low quality - a blog article by Larisa Alexandrovna repeating rumors, a bizarre and utterly unconvincing interpretation of a vague one-liner in a White House memo, and ostensible reprints of NATO and Washington internal documents with no convincing proof of their provenance. Ray^Talk 17:58, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I am wrong. I had mostly just skimmed the article, but I could only find one instance of a round-about population number thruought the entry.

I would like to see how the population had changed during and thruought China's history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.47.245.122 (talk) 18:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For more detail, with some history, see Demographics of the People's Republic of China. The article goes back to the first PRC censuses of the mid 20th century. —Akrabbim^talk 18:58, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "Historical Population" section of that article has estimates going back to 2100BC. TastyCakes (talk) 19:05, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the good ol' CIA World Factbook. I missed that part. —Akrabbim^talk 19:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to our Miswak article, Salvadora persica, the arak or peelu tree. Tevildo (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a short story for children from the book William the Detective – it isn't published any more as far as I know, due to its (debateable) anti-Semitism. Does anybody know of a (free) online source where I can get the whole text... Google Books? Something similar? Thanks! ╟─TreasuryTag►stannary parliament─╢ 13:37, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find an online text, but it appears that while the story was eventually removed from William the Detective, this did not happen until the Macmillan edition of 1986 and it was thus still in the Armada editions published in the 1970s. These can be obtained online for relatively little, for example here's one. This could be an alternative way for you to read the story if you wish. Karenjc 15:02, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea where such a hadith can be found? A muslim here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=det7TUsLy8U&feature=player_embedded seems to be quoting one from somewhere. Шизомби (talk) 16:40, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Talk:Gweilo#derogatory, Cheerful Eric mentions "It's a the result of several hundred years of living under British rule."

I came to think, is this the result of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis? I want to point out that "feilo" ("肥佬", meaning "fat man") is a very common word for calling males fat. It's systematic, and by that I mean that it is regularly used; some people are actually called Fat Man "肥佬", or people use it as a nickname, or people refer to these fat men as "Fat Man" "肥佬", in the way that they would say "Hey, Fat Man, come here.". This is seen in movies. Another example is Lydia Shum. In the article, it says "She was affectionately known to peers and fans as Feifei (肥肥) ...." (肥 meaning fat). If I were her, I would never let anyone call me that. And this is public.

There are other names that people call each other, but maybe someone can list them. So light of these phenomena, are these phenomena the result of

• Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
• The opposite of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, where culture affects the language (we and others (people) use)
• Linguistics (where the rules of Cantonese grammer and syntax require Cantonese people to be so forward with names)
• Anthropology (where Cantonese culture does not mind insulting names)?174.3.111.148 (talk) 18:36, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]