This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kjvenus (talk | contribs) at 19:27, 6 November 2006 (The Veil Controversy). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Reference Desk

November 3

Clothes of Jews in Spain in the 13th century

What clothes would Jews have worn in Spain in the 13th century? What laws forcing Jews to wear distinctive hats, badges, or other types of clothing were in effect there at that time? Mo-Al 00:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Have a look at the History of the Jews in Spain and see if your questions are answered there. You have to remember that Spain at the time you mention was divided between a Christian north and a Muslim south, with widely different practices in these matters. Clio the Muse 00:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't see much about clothing. I figure that the average Jew would have worn what the non-Jews did (which I would like to know), but I don't know what laws were under effect. Mo-Al 01:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

In 1215 the Fourth Lateran Council decreed that the Jews had to distinguish themselves from their Christian neighbours by wearing either a coloured badge, a different style of robe or a long pointed hat, known as a Judenhut, a practice adopted from earlier Muslim rulings on the same subject. How far this was practiced in Spain, and if it was observed with equal effect in the Christian and Muslim areas, is an open question. Jewish communities would clearly have been keen to avoid any form of stigma, and for a good bit of their history in Spain enjoyed reasonably good relations with their Muslim and Christian neighbours. In Christian Spain the general mood began to change towards the end of the fourteenth century. After the Cortes of Soria in 1380 Jews no longer dared to appear in public without the Lateran Council badge, which suggests that they may have been able to escape wearing this in earlier periods. Clio the Muse 02:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

See also Yellow badge. As for the general style of dress in 13th-century Spain, I don't have any expertise, but after searching Google Images for art from that period, it seems that both men and women tended to wear various gowns. Marco polo 02:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

The article on Yellow badge is rather odd in that it appears to make a notable distinction between "anti-semitism" and "humiliating Jews". I'm not sure what to make of that apparent distinction. Loomis 03:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

For the Muslim areas, see: Dhimmi#Distinctive_clothing, although it doesn't directly adress the situation in Al-Andalus. (Which I think was probably more liberal than in the Maghreb, if for no other reason than the fact that the population of dhimmi was much larger.) It also says: "Regulations on dhimmi clothing varied frequently to please the whims of the ruler." So the best bet might be "something yellow". The Judenhut was being used in France in the 13th century, so that's my guess for for the northern Christian kingdom. --BluePlatypus 03:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Note that in the 13th century there were in fact four distinct northern Christian kingdoms in the area now considered Spain: the Kingdoms of León, Castile, Navarre, and Aragón. The first two were united in 1230 as the Crown of Castile.  --Lambiam 08:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

History of Party Control of U.S. House & Senate

Hello, I am looking for the history of when various parties controlled the two houses of the U.S. Congress. Something like "Senate: Democrats 1881-1892, Republicans 1893-1901", etc. Pointers appreciated. — Arbogop 02:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Have a look at History of the United States Congress. There is a comprehensive breakdown of House and Senate membership. Clio the Muse 03:23, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Senate: http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item_and_teasers/partydiv.htm

House: http://clerk.house.gov/histHigh/Congressional_History/partyDiv.html -- Mwalcoff 04:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Question on the House numbers: The total of 435 members has been the case since 1913. However, haven't states been admitted to the Union since then, such as Alaska and Hawaii ? StuRat 17:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

In 1911 they capped the number at 435, I guess they felt it was in danger of getting even more unwieldy than it is. In 1941 they worked out the census math for determining how many reps each state gets . So unless they change it the house will always have 435 but they number each state has will vary according to population. So Alaska and Hawaii just stole some from other states. Nowimnthing 19:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. I imagine those states to lose Reps voted against adding the 49th and 50th states. StuRat 22:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

One would so imagine, but, in fact, no state lost a representative immediately upon the induction of Alaska and Hawai'i into the Union; in 1959, a new seat, as is observed, inter al., here, was crafted for each state, such that, until 1963 (that is, across the 86th and 87th Congresses), the House of Representatives comprised 437 members. Reapportionment in view of the 1960 census gave Hawai'i a second seat, but a representative of another state would not likely have opposed statehood in view of the prospective loss of one or more seats at the expense of Alaska and Hawai'i inasmuch as the net loss by the other forty-eight states was just three seats and inasmuch as it would have been exceedingly difficult to determine out from what states populations might have flowed (one might, I suppose, have had success approximating population change by region, but the calculation of the individual effects of any particular population changes would have remained exceedingly hard). In any event, there was much opposition to the admission of Alaska and, to a lesser extent, to that of Hawai'i, but the reasons were several and varied; this offers a brief summary of the reasons as regards Alaska. Joe 04:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

It appears that Alaska and Hawaii were considered together, and that many Southern congressmen opposed statehood for Alaska because they opposed statehood for liberal, multiracial Hawaii. -- Mwalcoff 00:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

A famous quote

I need to know who wrote this piece and also the entire text of the quote that is so famous from the WWII era where the speaker talks about how the Nazis kept taking away people from different groups and when they came for him, there was no one to save him---I have always loved that passage but I never have known the title of that piece, its author and the entire text--

Thank you

The author is Martin Niemöller; there have been lots of versions, which are discussed at First they came.... (Note that though our article calls it a "poem", it wasn't. - Nunh-huh 05:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Funny how that has been mutilated. I thought it was much longer, but it's only about communists, socialists and unionists. Then the communists were dropped (we can't feel sorry for them having been slaughtered, can we?) and the Jews and catholics were added to the list. Eh? Were catholics prosecuted by the nazis? DirkvdM 08:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

As far as I recall, Hitler didn't look favorably on the Pope. P.S. see Pope Pius XI for how Hitler viewed the church. Dismas| 09:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

It's always best to try to trace quotations and statements as close to the original source as possible, disregarding later adaptations. And yes, the Nazis did persecute-and prosecute- Catholics. The life expectancy of a Catholic priest in Poland under German occupation, to take but one example, tended to be somewhat brief. I would also like to underline the point being made by Nunh-huh: Niemöller's statement was not written as a poem, and it certainly does not read like one. Clio the Muse 09:23, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Dirk, one can certainly be glad that communism and communist ways are on the wane, but being glad that individuals were slaughtered is not something I would recommend. JackofOz 01:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Nuclear secrets

Would United States citizens responsible for making nuclear secrets publicly available on the internet most likely face charges of treason, espionage, or criminal negligence? What sentencing might be considered? —24.54.89.149 09:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

In general, revealing state secrets would be construed as treason, if the culprit was a citizen, and espionage if he or she was an alien. People have in the past been executed for both crimes in the US; but I suppose it would depend on the circumstances in which the information was revealed. The manner you have described would, I imagine, be treated less seriously than if the information had been given in secret to a foreign government Clio the Muse 09:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

And if the person were a government employee acting on the direct orders of Congress, I doubt any criminal penalties would be applicable at all. (Edit: I know you included this link, just making it more obvious.) Tesseran 12:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

While people have been executed for espionage and treason, none have been recently. The last execution for treason was 1862 and the last for espionage were Julius and Ethel Rosenberg (U.S. citizens executed for espionage, not treason.) We do have one "American al-Qaeda", Adam Yahiye Gadahn, currently indicted for treason but he "remains at large". Ryan G. Anderson recently received life in prison for attempted espionage. Rmhermen 14:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, the U.S. government went through a big effort some years back to prevent "plans for making a hydrogen bomb" from being published in newspapers, and it was all public domain stuff, like a Worldbook Encyclopedia article and documents in libraries. They figured that little countries and bad guys were not clever or resourceful enough to do their own library research. Was it treason to print it? Or just stupid "making a point"? Edison 16:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

The case was United States v. The Progressive. In the end the government dropped the case because it looked like it was going to get the born secret clause thrown out; it was becoming very hard to claim that information assembled in the open literature could constitute something classified. In any case it is a lot harder to make a hydrogen bomb than just having a schematic (and probably only half-accurate) blueprint. --Fastfission 13:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, there are different levels of accessibility to public records. My usual example of this is the price I paid for my home. It was always available to anyone who wanted to go to the county registrar and page through books of records, however, when they made it available to anybody, worldwide, on the Internet just by typing in my address, I considered that to be a bit rude. In the case of "how to build a nuclear bomb", if portions of that info are available in various US libraries, that would take a lot more effort for a terrorist in Pakistan to access than if it was all organized and posted online. Also note that, under the USA PATRIOT Act, US library customers who check out such books can be closely scrutinized. StuRat 17:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure, but if the president 'approved' the site's creation, ultimately he is responsible. So, he couldn't be charged with anything, only impeached. If he were impeached, then he could be charged, but any acting president would probably grant him immunity. Plus, these things really aren't that secret, so I don't think you could make a case for any charges. --Cody.Pope 18:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

There are a number of laws which regulate this. Technically all nuclear information is born secret until officially declassified, though attempts to enforce this in court are rare (see the link to the Progressive case above). So a lot of it comes down to whether or not the "secrets" were created within the nuclear laboratory system or not. If you released secret information which had been created by the U.S. government then you could possibly be charged with espionage or other violations of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. If you found your own way to make "nuclear secrets" they would probably not charge you — it is better for them to just say nothing when people claim to be releasing "secrets" than it is for them to try and crack down on them which draws attention and would also "validate" the secrets. There are also other statutes that could come into play as well (and if the government itself released the secrets it could be cited as a violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty). --Fastfission 13:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Sources for Acts of the Apostles

Over at Acts of the Apostles, we trying to find a good cite that talks about what influence (if any) The Gospel of Mark and the Q Source had upon Acts. Most scholars look at the issue like this:

• Mark and Q were the used as the sources for The Gospel of Luke.
• Luke and Acts were written by the same author.
• The Gospel of Luke was, in some ways a 'source' for Acts, i.e. the author drew upon his earlier research in Luke to then go on to creat Acts.

So, it seems reasonable to assume that Mark and Q had some, albeit indirect, influence on Acts. The problem is-- that's original research unless we can find a good cite talking about the fact that Mark and Q were used as a source for Acts.

Scavenger hunt! can anyone find one? --Alecmconroy 09:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't have one at hand, although I might find something at the library, but I never thought that Luke was so closely associated with Paul. That's just my ignorance, I suppose, but I had always had it that Acts relies upon a first-hand Pauline and Petrine account. Geogre 17:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

There is a lot of work in Pauline Christianity to tie the Gospels to the works of Paul. At the same time, anti-Pauline Christianity tries to separate them. --Kainaw 18:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I have only been able to find negative information for you, e.g.:

In spite of the massive work accomplished by M. E. Boismard and A. Lamouille (Actes des deux apôtres, I–III, 1990), I can only agree with the position put forward by their predecessor in the same collection in 1926: 'We must conclude that all of the attempts to determine the exact sources of Acts from a literary point of view have failed. It is useless to go into the details and try to identify a source document for one part or another, because the writer has not literally reproduced his sources; he has reworked them with his own vocabulary and style' (E. Jacquier,Actes des apôtres, 1926, p. cxliv; my translation). Marguerat, Daniel (2002). The First Christian Historian: Writing the "Acts of the Apostles". pp. footnote #47, p. 16.

I found an author which calls Mark a "major source" for the two volume Luke-Acts (Duling, Dennis C. (1982). The New Testament, an Introduction: Proclamation and Parenesis, Myth and History. pp. p. 323. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)), yet when comparing the two:

But the major difference between Mark and Luke-Acts is, of course, the sheer existence of the Acts of the Apostles itself. Ibid, p. 326

I wasn't able to find any support for you third bullet point (Luke as a source for Acts), rather, everything i saw described Luke and Acts as the same work.EricR 03:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Internecine conflict

I'm looking for a list of case studies or examples of internecine conflict where one group could be characterised as the 'freedom fighters' or 'liberation movement', and the other group could be characterised as 'state-sponsored' or 'government aligned'. In particular, I would like to find a few examples where the conflicts have been 'resolved' both between the liberation movement and the 'state', and therefore between the anti- and pro- government factions themselves. I'm thinking about the ANC and Inkatha in South Africa; the Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA) and the Bougainville Resistance Force (BRF) in Bougainville; perhaps the RUF and the Kamajors in Sierra Leone (if that reconciliation has happened yet?). I know there are more examples, and I'll appreciate any brief list someone could provide or point me towards, or any other specific examples that could be posted here. Thanks if you can help.

Other examples from Africa could include the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the past 5 years, and Angola a few years ago. Such a process may now be underway in Côte d'Ivoire. Examples from Central America in the early 1990s include Guatemala and El Salvador. Marco polo 15:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Would Ireland and the IRA qualify? Anchoress 15:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

We were thinking the same thing, Anchoress! I was adding to my comment the participation of the IRA and the Unionists in the Northern Ireland peace process at the same time you were typing your comment. (I backed out of the edit conflict because I am not sure how that would end up displaying.) Marco polo 15:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

For a small scale conflict, how about Oka Crisis in Canada ? StuRat 17:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

There are many small scale conflicts in Nigeria. A very brief overview explained to me by a doctor from South Nigeria: It used to be that Islamic Northern Nigeria was the profit center with peanut crops. The Christian Southern Nigeria were seen as poor criminals living off the charity of the north. Then, oil changed it around. The south is the profit center and the north has largely abandoned any industry and lives off the profits from the south. The quick shift still erupts in small scale conflicts between the Islamic north and Christian south. This history was explained to me by a Christian from the south. I don't know anyone from Northern Nigeria to get an opposing view on the conflicts. --Kainaw 18:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Derail. Yes, I've heard similar things, also from a sourthern perspective. They say that the only reason that the Islamic Northerners don't secede (and being the majority, they wouldn't have too much trouble) is because they depend on the south's oil. But that isn't to say that all parts of the south get the oil revenue they deserve; consider the inhabitants of the Niger Delta area, who regularly seize wells because they get plenty of pollution, but little money. Picaroon9288 21:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Colombia. -THB 01:12, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Old Testament

Philistine = Canaan? Neighboring areas? --Patchouli 15:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

As I understand it, Canaan is an area, and any people in it were called Canaanites (with the possible exception of Jews). Philistines, on the other hand, were a specific ethnic group, likely of Greek origin, which lived in that region. Thus, the Philistines were Canaanites, but not all Canaanites were Philistines. StuRat 17:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, yes and no. Canaan was (roughly) the territory of modern Israel. The Philistines lived in what is (roughly) today's Gaza Strip. Although the two groups were neighbors, they had distinct cultural identities. It is speculated that the Philistines were, in the time of the Judges, fairly recent colonizers from, perhaps, Cyprus. Not much is known about the Philistines due to a lack of their cultural artifacts, not surprising as they were, after all, Philistines. :-) B00P 18:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Coincidentally, the Arabic word for Palestine is Philistine. This is how I have heard Arabs talk about Palestinians, Philistines.--Patchouli 18:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Ancient Philistia was a small coastal region within Canaan. It included what is now the Gaza Strip and a territory extending farther north, to the present day area of Tel Aviv. Canaan covered an area somewhat larger than present-day Israel. It also included Gaza, the West Bank, Golan, and adjacent parts of Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. The southern part of the region was later known as Judah, and much of former Palestine was still later known as Judaea (or Iudaia) under the Hellenistic Greeks and Romans. The region first acquired the name Palaestina after the First Jewish-Roman War. After this war, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and changed the name of the province from "Judaea" to "Syria Palaestina" (i.e. Philistine Syria) after the Philistines, so as to deny the Jews' claim to the land. From that time until the 20th century, the area was known as Palestina (or Palestine in English). The Arabic name for the region (Falastin) is taken not from the word "Philistine" but from the name of the Roman province. Marco polo 18:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

The explanations are great. Thank you.--Patchouli 19:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I know quite a few philistines, but none of them are Canaanites to my knowledge. :) JackofOz 01:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Student Council Help

Where can I find some ideas and slogans for elementary type elections. He needs to find a slogan for his election posters. Thank You

PS: Make sure that the slogans are age approriate. G and PG only --Devol4 20:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Rhyming is usually important if you're in elementary school (or if you're Jesse Jackson). What's his first name (so we can suggest a nice rhyming slogan) ? StuRat 23:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

You might find some ideas at slogan.--Shantavira 10:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

His first name is Daniel and he is running for 5th grade represenative

Vote for Daniel

(he's our Willie Stark)

in this an'ual

schoolteacher's lark.

Lowerarchy 03:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Congress Meets

How many times does congress meet in one year?

Assuming you mean the US Congress, they're only constitutionally required to meet once per year, but never actually meet that rarely. See United States Congress for more info. -Elmer Clark 22:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Can Wilkipedia handle extremely pointed accurate statements?..

I deleted my ceilings to thought-processing, 30-years ago, and connected to various cosmic anomalies... I am writing an encyclopedia and dictionary, essentially from the near the year 45,000AD... My work freaks people out... Seems this Species fears New more than they fear death... plus it seems that religious design, has established a religious conditioning that causes the thinker a migraine when the mind accesses thought beyond the Faithful's permitted 7% mind-usage... My writings give people serious migraines, in forcing them to try to "think out of the box"... at which time, they too often defend themselves by acting as mindless psychotic apes...

I would publish this following truth-piece, and pieces like it.. if you people tell me that your project can handle my literary artistry and levels of insight...

"If "democracy" were truly Democracy.. then instead of spending a billion dollars, every four years, of the nation's money, for a pompous election.. the guy who knows he can't do the job, simply offers the job to the Best one who CAN do it... The EXPERIMENT that we called "DEMOCRACY", has not worked... It failed to provide honest human governance... Democracy has become a modified ("state of the art") form of Slavery...

For the sake of the survival of the Human Species, Democracy must be flushed from Humanity, and replaced with a state of the art form of governance that Does work, is relatively viably crime-proof, is life-based, not religion and money based... Or humanity will be 100% extinct by the year 145,732AD... and near the year 155,000AD the planet will not be able to support even the life of a hardy beetle.".. That you can bank-on... Anyone with an open mind, who has a basic grasp of "time-travel", can view DNA's molecular memories of the last human, in the time-period of near the year 145,730AD, cracking the marrow out of the bones of the second last human..."

Rather than me, you, and readers, getting into flame-fights and troubles, for something too-extreme I posted.. I request an open-minded editor's email address, for me to send what I intend to post.. so to have you post it, or to receive your approval for posting the entry(s)...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.112.178.67 (talk • contribs)

People, I am new to this, so can I ask if the above nonsense-which shows clear signs of mental imbalance-can de deleted? Clio the Muse 23:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Its your POV that it is mental imbalance. However, I think the weight of argument against this post show that it does NOt require deletion. The thought has already been killed many times over.--Light current 23:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not a place for original research, regardless of how extreme the research is. --Kainaw 21:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Get your book published, then we can TALK ABOUT IT! 8-)--Light current 21:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I, and most editors, would delete something like that immediately, if posted to an article. StuRat 21:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Do we still have speedy article deletion?--Light current 22:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Read WP:V and WP:NOR. -Elmer Clark 22:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Also Misplaced Pages:NPOV. | AndonicO Talk 22:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but what you've written is something that most people would never be able to understand. Trying to get people to understand your ideas in this way will be a great struggle for you. If you talk to a psychiatrist, however, he or she might be able to help you. Best of luck. --Grace 23:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

His butt must be his calculator, cause whereas most people pull data from a calculator.... --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 05:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Seems to me the question asked is completely valid if only asked in a very esthetised way. 1.Is there a post-democratic form of social organization that could be found more efficient that our democratic regimes? 2.What kind of outlook might our descendants have on the way we manage our political life today? Although our friend from the future seems to have poor grasp of human psychology (so do i) and power relationship in societies, maybe all psychological problems having been solved our g-g-g-g-g-g-grand-children wont be able to understand why we were such a hieratic bunch. It seems the questioner is mostly critisizing democracy's efficiency but doesn't propose an alternative idea. Especially the assumption that it is democracy that is ruining our direct environment seems a bit too quick. And all this off course can only happen on the desk not in any article ... or maybe in a article about post democratic regimes.Keria 10:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

No, the failures in the original statement is that it jumps to conclusions. Some parts are feasible, sure, but saying failed democracy becomes slavery is utter cruft. And the election doesn't cost billions every four years. It's their policies that might cost billions. And the op confuses government with economics, such as confusing communism and socialism. Democratic probably isn't causing much of the resources to be depleted. It's more likely the booming population as well as -maybe- capitalism. Scientifically, Earth can only support so many humans. And our DNA doesn't hold events in history, so you can't analyze it that way. And what the op is asking for is an utopia, which everyone knows can't exist because one rotten apple will spoil the entire thing. That's hardly government, and is all but a dream. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 18:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the views of the writer. The democracy that is being imposed is of the western form. It is a manifestation of impatience for desires. The east is being subjected to western imperialism till date. There is no doubt about the double standards perpetrated by the west. The west is imposing its way of materialistic life and freedom and no consideration for the poor. It stems from the sheer imperialistic dominant attitude on part of the west. Kjvenus 19:15, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Origin of Alternate German lyrics for Silent Night

The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, whose member were German speakers in the 19th century, had a different set of lyrics, which are used today in some of their churches at Christmas, even though services are in English. They were printed in a Youth Hymnal in the 1890s. I believe all the verses were different, but remember only the first one, which goes "Stille nacht, heilige nacht, alles schlaft, Einsam wacht, nur das Heilige Eltern Paar, das im Stalle zu Bethlehem war, bei dem himmlischen Kind, bei dem himmlischen kind." How did it happen that those Germans brought a variant version over to the U.S. in the 19th century? The article Silent Night has no mention of these other lyrics. Edison 21:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I thought that both that song, and Oh Christmas Tree (Oh Tannenbaum), were originally in German, and were then translated into English. StuRat 23:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right, but the lyrics he's quoted are not those original German lyrics, but a variant. I don't know their origin, but I don't think it's all that odd that there are two versions (at least) of the lyrics in German. - Nunh-huh 23:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Most likely the German Lutheran immigrants during the 1830s and 1840s who founded the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod did not bring any version of Silent Night with them. The carol from 1818 was almost certainly not yet widely known and popular then, and certainly not among German Lutherans: the song has an Austrian Catholic pedigree. When the members of the congregation came into contact with it, it was most likely the English version they heard, and the variant German version is probably a free translation of the English lyrics, themselves a rather free translation of the original German text. Some other languages also have several rather different versions based on free translations.  --Lambiam 01:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

history of physics

what year did William Gilbert investigate magnetism and electricity?

The article you linked to indicates that he published his book on the subject in 1600. dpotter 23:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

If it says so!--Light current 00:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

November 4

Japanese paper fans and comedy

It seems the Japanese have a penchant or liking to hit people on the head (or elsewhere) with a huge, folded paper fan. I see this alot on comedy shows.

Why do they do this? Is there something inherently funny about it other than what is seen? Is it a cultural thing?

Thanks, --69.138.61.168 02:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Probably a cultural thing, like maybe wedgies. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 02:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

...or a coconut cream pie to the face. StuRat 05:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree that it's a cultural thing. But a little dose of violence being funny is kind of universal. Here in the Philippines, comedians usually hit someone's head with a rolled up newspaper and it's supposed to be funny. And like you said in the US, they have the wedgies and the cream pie. There's also Kancho in South Korea and Japan, which is called "tamis" in the Philippines.Moonwalkerwiz 05:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Ouch, kancho... 惑乱 分からん 06:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

This question also brings to my mind the Three Stooges. Poking someone in the eyes isn't nearly as popular as it used to be but it still closely associated with them. Dismas| 17:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

This is what you get when the Japanese do a wedgie.  --Lambiam 15:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad to see that they encourage flossing. :-) StuRat 18:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

living outside the system

Is it still possible in this day and age for a person to live on the road, living and working in one place for awhile and then moving on to somewhere else? Is it still possible to avoid the rat race and be free? What does a person do if they value experience more than social status or money? well within reason. I live in a prosperous western european country. I have a decent, but not great education. I would like to read your opinions and learn of any books or websites on this subject. I know many people will find this question immature and want to tell me to grow up, but I would apreciate your criticism without personal abuse.

Thanks --213.202.146.136 03:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Well well...quite an interesting question. I have often thought about this after reading On the Road. You are limited by 3 factors:

1. Food 2. Transportation 3. Money

1. Unless you bring food beforehand, you will have to buy it, steal it, grow it, or hunt it. There are a number of tricks (like lying to the McDonalds drive-thru people) to getting free food, and I sugguest you learn some of them; especially if your money is tight.

2. Do you have a car? People rarely pick up hitchhikers anymore like they did in the 40's and 50's. Back then, hitchhikers didn't kill or rape the people that picked them up. You might take buses, which are fairly cheap nowadays. Trains and planes are out of the question...usually too expensive.

3. No matter what you do, you will be part of the rat race, working job to job as you work around the country to get some money for your trips. You WILL inevitably run out of money eventually. Since you'll only be working in a particular area a few months at a time, you'll probably be limited to working part-time at places similar to the local Circle K or Dennis. (Denny's --Anon.)

As for like experiences, I've been on the road a few times, and, I must say, there really isn't much to it. A city is a city is a city. A prarie is a prarie, a mountian is a mountian. There are a differences between them, but not much.

Hope that helps. --69.138.61.168 03:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I think a lot of young people have a romantic idea of living on the street. They think that if they aren't beholden to anyone they are freer. It often turns out to be the other way around: they end up the victims of violence, they suffer from violence, they end up turning to drink and drugs. Here's a question: imagine you're living at large. Suddenly an unexpected cold snap hits and the temperature reaches below zero F. There is no room at the shelters. You can't afford a room anywhere even if one was available. You can't afford to leave town. What do you do? About 5,000 people in Calgary right now (over half of whom are working full-time) are asking themselves that same question tonight. --Charlene 06:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

The question made me think of the mathematician Paul Erdős, who, oddly enough, I was just talking to someone about today. He was an exceptional case, being sufficiently talented at his work that other mathematicians or math departments were happy to have him as a guest; I presume they also paid his traveling expenses. He lived and worked for decades with no permanent address. --Anonymous, 05:10 UTC, November 4.

I think that this is actually easier to do now, because of globalization. Systems of different spheres of life tend to be standardized so it's easier to get in and out of something. For example, you can get money anywhere as long as there is an ATM machine around. Many kinds of jobs can be done with people miles away from you because of the Internet. You are always free to move around as long as you have money. Changing jobs is much easier too because resumes are kind of standardized and different institutions will tend to recognize the same qualities or proofs of your competence (if you're from Harvard you can be anyone or anything). But the bottomline is you still have to have capital, whether economic , social, cultural or symbolic .Moonwalkerwiz 05:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you should try to hook-up with some travellers. "Run away with the gypsys" as it were. Note: this is probably a Very Bad Idea. Skittle 13:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

As far as the not having a car angle goes... It depends on where you live just how well hitchhiking is looked upon. I was surprised to see so many hitchhikers when I moved to Vermont. I've never lived where it's so prevalent. The cops don't seem to care and people regularly pick up hitchhikers especially ones that they see daily. Dismas| 17:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I have a friend who has been living "outside the system" for many years now. She and her boyfriend have very few possesions, and travel around the country staying with friends, or at gatherings. They pick up odd jobs here and there, and stay with friends in exchange for working or doing chores and things like that to earn their keep. What makes it work for them is that they like people, enjoy meeting new people, and know how to find people who have the same ideals they do. 192.168.1.1 4:03, 4 November 2006 (PST)

Health care prices are a pretty nasty complication in most of the U.S. Wareh 04:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• squatting could be one answer. By the way I think your ambitions are admirable --Amists 14:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, see Perpetual traveler. -THB 02:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Run away and join the circus

Is the source upon which this article is based listed anywhere in Misplaced Pages?

I am reading an article concerned with property law. It is "leasehold estate", the section on 'duties of landlord'. Can you tell me where the laws are that that section is based on. If the laws aren't listed somewhere in Misplaced Pages,in a bibliorgraphy, where are they; in a Federal Code, or what? I would appreciate an answer as soon as possible as this relates to an important and time sensitive event in my life. Thank you very much. I really appreciate Misplaced Pages, it has helped me with alot of things. I just need to know the specifics of this particular article:ie, the laws behind it.
<Removed email to protect you from international spam Skittle 13:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)>

According to the article this is common law, that is, law established by tradition antedating statury law making. The article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition; possibly that includes the section on "duties of the landlord".  --Lambiam 15:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Pop song - I need to download the song

I heard a song in fm. middle lines were: "oh baby when you talk like that, you make women go mad. oh baby when you dance like that...."

can anyone help me with details and possible site for download>

thanks

• The song is Shakira's "Hips Don't Lie" and it can be found at most online music stores (i. e. iTunes). Abeg92 14:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

• • The video is on YouTube. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

And is highly recommended. --ByeByeBaby 20:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Election Deposit

What exactly is it?(seems pretty UK-centric) Can someone create a page on it? Abeg92 14:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

It's basically where all candidates standing for election have to pay a fee in order to stand. This definitely applies in UK general elections, but I don't know about UK local elections or elections in other countries. They get it back if their percentage of the vote is above a certain amount (not sure what that is). It's almost unheard of for one of the major parties (Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat) to lose their deposits, but small parties and independent candidates lose theirs all the time. A few years ago the deposit was raised from, I think, £150 to £1000, and there was criticism that this move acted as a deterrent to small parties to stand for election. Richardrj 15:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I remember reading in Kaka Joginder Singh (a pretty dedicated guy) that India's election deposits were raised from 2,000 rupees to 15,000 in 1997, so it seems they are used in other Commonwealth countries. It does sound like a page on the topic would be warranted. And I do agree with the idea. While the occasional Tarquin Fin-tim-lin-bin-whin-bim-lim-bus-stop-F'tang-F'tang-Olé-Biscuitbarrel is amusing, it'd get annoying to have to go through a huge list of such every time. GeeJo ⁄_(c) • 17:17, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a measure passed by the major parties to prevent small parties and independents from gaining a foothold. StuRat 15:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

The deposit is £500, it's designed to keep the elections serious, because it stops people from going onto the ballot frivolously if you can't afford to put that down. You get the deposit back if you score higher than 5% of the vote, demonstrating that you were a serious candidate. Interestingly, you don't necessarily get the deposit back just because you win - in a theoretical election with 21 or more candidates, everyone could score less than 5%. Nobody would get back their deposit in that scenario, but whoever got the most votes would win the seat. --Mnemeson 15:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

The deposit is not unreasonable for Parliamentary candidates, as it tries to keep the nutcases off the ballot paper, and you do get it back if you poll more than 5% of the votes. Back when the deposit was £150 you sometimes got a couple of dozen candidates at some by-elections, most of whom were using it as a very cheap form of advertising for their local businesses, as Parliamentary candidates get a free postal delivery to every elector. There's no deposit if you're standing for election to a local council - you just need the signatures of ten people on the electoral register on the nomination form (a former candidate writes...) -- Arwel (talk) 19:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

In the US, we normally discourage the nut-jobs by requiring a certain number of signatures. This should work with everyone, whereas the money deposit would have no effect on discouraging rich nut-jobs. StuRat 21:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I think a signature requirement is much better than a deposit. 5% of the vote is a lot to risk a thousand bucks on (the first go-around anyway), since it often takes time for a party or candidate to gain a foothold on the electoral stage. Discouraging nutjobs is fine in principle, but elitism in a process that is supposed to be completely democratic is not fine. Geez, I can't believe that I agree with StuRat about something political. What is the world coming to? Anchoress 01:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

The British system requires both. Neither the money nor the requirement for the support of a certain proportion of the local electors discourages eccentrics. Eccentrics will always find other eccentrics who share their view of things. Clio the Muse 01:10, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Could someone explain, for yanks, what a "by-election" is? Does Ipswich have them a lot, or does "Ipswich by-election" just stick in the mind more than others? ThanksEdison 02:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

A byelection is what happens when a representative cannot serve out his/her term, and a new representative must be elected before the general election takes place. Anchoress 02:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Edison, they are the equivalent of special elections in the US. I do not think Ipswich is more prone to wastage of MPs than any other British constituency; so it clearly has just stuck in your mind. Clio the Muse 03:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Some US states have special elections to fill vacancies, while others have the governor or legislature appoint a temporary replacement. StuRat 09:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

In the parliamentary system, you don't have to be a member of parliament to become leader of a party (even leader of the governing party), but it helps of course, otherwise you can't really participate in parliament. A newly chosen party leader, who has not yet been elected to parliament (or even worse, a party leader who embarrassingly loses his own seat) usually has the authority to "force" a current party member, in a "safe" constituency, to resign his/her seat, and allow the leader to run in his/her place in a byelection, in that way getting an almost free pass into parliament. I don't know of the political leanings of the "Ipswich" constituency in partiular, but is it perhaps considered a sort of "shoe-in" riding for any of the particular parties? I.e, is it a pretty much guaranteed Tory or Labour seat? If so, that might explain the "Ipswich byelection" thing. Loomis 14:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

According to Channel 4 the deposit requirement was introduced as part of the Representation of the People Act 1918 and was presumably a safeguard, given the increase in the size of the electorate, against frivolous candidatures. The threshold was only brought down from 12.5% of the vote to 5% in 1985, by the Representation of the People Act 1985. I'd have to say that requiring every candidate to raise and risk £500 is a much smaller barrier to effective democracy, in my opinion, than the ability of major parties to raise and spend millions on campaigning. Mattley 10:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

See also electoral threshold, a similar concept to keep fraudulent or dangerous parties out of legislatures. 68.39.174.238 04:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Early Christian cults

In the interim period between the death of Christ and the formalization of the Roman Catholic church, much of Christianity was in the form of small cults (in the historical/religious studies sense, not the current popular connotation) which worshipped Jesus. However, given that one of the principles in Christianity is the concept of the holy trinity; were there cults that principally worshipped the other aspects of the Trinity and didn't focus (as much) on Jesus himself? Virogtheconq 15:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Isn't that like asking, were there early Christians that didn't worship Jesus? This to me seems a little nonsensical (in so much as, early Christians that didn't focus on Jesus weren't really early Christians). There were Christians that didn't use the trinity, see: Nontrinitarianism --Cody.Pope 16:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

See also: gnosticism GeeJo ⁄_(c) • 16:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that the obvious thing to look at is Arianism, a doctrine based on the notion that the Father is superior to the Son. It was the rejection of this that led the mainstream of the Church to formulate the Nicene Creed, though Arianism remained popular among many of the barbarian tribes, including the Goths and the Vandals. Clio the Muse 23:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

No more wrist watches?

Is the wrist watch likely to become extinct during the next 20 or 30 years, superseded by hand-held devices? The evening news recently raised this question, pointing out that rapidly converging personal electronic tools - cell phone, camera, Internet searcher, game player, etc. - include the time as a very minor bit of information. 66.213.33.2 17:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I will never stop wearing a watch, no matter how many hand-held devices I've got with me, for the simple reason that nothing is easier than looking at your wrist when you want to know the time. --Richardrj 17:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll second this one - it's a pain to have to dig out my cell phone to find the time (as I do when I forget my watch somewhere), while you don't need a free hand to glance at your wrist. So no, it won't...although Light's idea is plausible XD —Keakealani 19:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe its more likely that phones will be worn on the wrist and serve multiple purposes. 8-)--Light current 17:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Now that's a novel idea:

StuRat 21:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I thought it was quite comic actually! THanks for that gift!--Light current 21:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Although this will go against the watch lobbyists (kidding... :^) I read an article a couple months ago, don't remember where, that said that watch sales had been on a slow decline since the boom of cell phones. Though I have to agree with what's been said. I've changed the brand of pants that I wear because the watch pocket that is sewn on Levi's no longer is large enough to fit a pocket watch. I now where Carharts because my pocket watch fits well in the pocket and the chain can easily be attached to the nearest belt loop. Dismas| 01:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I read an article like that as well. I’m one of those who has stopped wearing a wristwatch. I just look at my cell phone, or if I’m at the hospital, my pager. While those in older generations are likely still partial to wearing wrist watches, I would expect that those growing up with cell phones will find little reason to wear a watch as well. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I would expect wristwatch sales to continue to decline until they incorporate cell phones and computers into them. At that point, sales should increase (while sales of those other devices will decline). StuRat 09:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

If we define wristwatch as a device that's worn on the wrist whose main purpose is timekeeping, then I expect wristwatches will eventually go the way of the pocket watch or handkerchief and slowly fade out of general use. I know that the strap on my watch broke last January, and I've been reliant on cell phones and MP3 players since. (In 2065 or so, wearing a wristwatch might be a stereotypical trait of the elderly.) Certainly it's possible that electronic devices may be worn on the wrist commonly, although I've seen MP3 players, USB keys and cell phones around the neck more commonly. One potential restriction around wrist wear is the simple physical size needed to make a usable device -- a screen too small is unreadable, and buttons too small are hard to press. It's interesting, though, that wall clocks are still common devices, even though wristwatches have been common for decades, and everything has the time on it these days. I'd assume that clocks will be with us for a while longer. --ByeByeBaby 20:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I for one will probably never stop wearing wristwatches. Mine broke about a month ago, and I haven't bought a new one; I will however, because I hate looking for all those devices/gadgets. When I'm on Misplaced Pages however, I just look at the computer's clock. | AndonicO Talk 01:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Sabbath in Egypt

What is the typical weekly 'day off' in Egypt? I would have thought it'd be Friday, but I'm chatting on YahooIM with someone who claims he's living in Egypt and he says it's Sunday. Anyone know for sure? Anchoress 17:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the day off could have been chosen for two reasons, either religious (the major population seems to be Muslim, but the government atheist or secular IIRC) or economical, which day would be most appropriate for internatiopnal trade? Of course, that's not an answer to your question... =S 惑乱 分からん 17:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps your friend is Coptic? For Muslims Friday would certainly be the sabbath; perhaps Sunday is just a general day off? Clio the Muse 23:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Well he's not my friend, lol, and I know already he's Christian. But I'm not asking about him, I'm asking about Egypt in general. He says everyone takes the day off on Sunday, and nobody takes Friday off. Anchoress 01:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I used the word 'friend' in a generic sense (lol?) to describe someone with whom you were communicating. Perhaps you would have preferred 'interloctor', technically more correct? Anyway, assuming he is not attempting to mislead you, Sunday may very well be the general 'secular' day-off. Clio the Muse 01:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, it's a moot point now. I was suspicious that he was lying about being in Egypt, that's why I asked. I don't know if he's on the level about Egypt, but it's definitely the new Nigerian scam. Yahoo!IMing 30-something single women in North America. Someone else just chatted me with exactly the same story. And both of them have asked me to write them a letter of intent so they can get Visas to come to Canada. LOL. Anchoress 17:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I'm egyptian, and I need a visa for Canada. Could you help me please? | AndonicO Talk 01:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

that's pretty... overconfident? saying you can move through the world without a visa. anyway let's get back to OQ2: the most appropiate day for international trade would most likely be sunday or monday, sunday because quite a lot of the wealthy countries have that as Sabbath. monday because on monday the wealthy countries are still slowly warming up for the rest of the week and in this case even more NOT sunday because it would give them a 1-day advantage, which is not completely lost on monday because productivity is generally lower on the first day of the week.(not workweek but week, considering going from monday-sunday)

What exactly is the difference between a Portuguese cavaquinho and a Hawaiian ukulele?

From what I've read, the ukulele was brought to Hawaii by the Portuguese. Have any significant differences evolved in sound between the two? Can I play samba music on a ukulele, for example?

You can play pretty much anything on an ukulele XD I think there are some tuning differences, and probably the way the art style evolved...the way ukuleles are made now is probably different from the way it is in Portugal, in terms of the ornaments and stuff, but the basic idea is pretty similar. —Keakealani 19:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

The difference is like the difference between a fiddle and a violin. -THB 00:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Pinochet dictatorship

Hi, Misplaced Pages community!

I'm writing an essay on the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile (1973-1990). The task is the following:

"When the military Junta took power, it declared its intention to stay in power 'only as long as circumstances require it'. However, the dictatorship lasted 17 years. Explain the long duration of this regime. Also, explain why Pinochet could not stay in power until 1998, as he had planned, although he maintained an important position well into the 90's".

• I was wondering if anyone is aware of any articles published or any research into the topic of Latin American military dictatorships of the twentieth century.
• Also, it seems dictatorships tend to last long. Are there any well accepted theories as to the reasons of this? If so, can anyone give me author names?

Thanks a lot, people!

--Thor Waldsen 21:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Start with Pinochet, Chile under Pinochet and the History of Chile. Then I would suggest that you look at Dictatorship and Military dictatorship as general topics. The important point to bear in mind is that dictatorships of the Pinochet variety are always self-serving, and by their very nature will define when and if they are prepared to surrender power; 'national emergencies' have a tendency to last longer than initially claimed. Dictatorships of the fascist and communist variety, moreover, tend to see themselves as perpetual. Once you have done some more research I would be happy to tackle any specific questions you may have. Clio the Muse 23:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

It generally requires a violent revolution to oust a dictator. Depending on the military strength of the dictatorship, even this method may be impossible. StuRat 08:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget the role of outside powers. Foreign support may make a substantial difference to the ability of a dictatorship to establish itself in the first place, and then to remain in power once established. Mattley 11:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds great. I'll start by printing those articles and reading them. You've given me something to build on, people... thanks! --Thor Waldsen 21:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Looking for a film about love

Hello, I am looking for a movie about love between people who have the wrong idea about one another's personality and character, similar to A Doll's House. Thanks --(Aytakin) | Talk 23:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

There are quite a few about a one-way misperception, especially when the person was intentionally deceptive. Two-way misperceptions would be rarer, but perhaps Sleeping with the Enemy or True Lies would be examples. Are you looking for one-way or two-way misperceptions ? StuRat 08:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

The absolute original, Pride and Prejudice. It's been filmed several times. You've Got Mail, The Shop Around the Corner, The Crying Game, M. Butterfly, Madame Bovary, Lolita (also filmed several times), Total Recall, Ever After. Anchoress 20:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Mr. and Mrs. Smith? :) -Elmer Clark 02:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

November 5

Egyptian Happyness

I just got an extreemly lousy question for my homework: Are the Egyptians happy with their government? I have no idea either why I would be asked that. So... how/where would I find the answer to that question? Help much appreciated ---- MayhemMessiah Nov 4, 2006 6:16pm (GMT)

Why not just ask an Egyptian??. -- Chris 18:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Lousy question? I would say that it was close to impossible. How do you measure 'happiness', and this applies to any political system, not just the Egyptian? Anyway, sorry if this sounds too negative. Begin with the Politics of Egypt and Hosni Mubarak. Perhaps it might help if I tell you that there has been a general decline in levels of support for President Mubarak because of allegations of corruption and concerns about the future direction of Egyptian politics. There is also an active Islamist movement in Egypt, hostile to Mubarak's 'secular' form of government. Have a look at the pages I have suggested, then we will take it from there. Good luck. Clio the Muse 00:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

The results of this google search might give you a teensy bit of help. I agree that it's a really tough one. Unless there's a recent news article from a prominent media outlet that you're supposed to know about. OTOH, THIS google result shows a bunch of hits for a recent news item that the majority of Egyptians don't even know what an opinion poll is, so maybe it's a trick question, meant to convey the different way some societies go about assessing the opinions of citizens? Anchoress 01:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

And here's a short article that addresses the issue. Anchoress 01:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'll be specific about those who are unhappy with the government; your teacher will probably want examples. Anyways, there are several groups in Egypt that oppose the Mubarak regime. First, there are Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood who favor the implementation of Islamic law in the country. The Brotherhood itself is widely popular (not to mention outlawed.) Also, there are reformist liberals who speak out against the president in the newspapers, and are regularly arrested. For examples, look through the categories Egyptian human rights activists, Egyptian journalists, and other categories to be found at Egyptian people by occupation. (I bet the reason many of them have Misplaced Pages articles is because their arrests were written about!) Then, there are millions of Egyptians (see Hepatitis C#Epidemiology and this salon.com article) who were accidentally infected with Hepatitis C during a vaccination campaign against Schistosomiasis; call it original research, but I doubt that they're happy with the government. And for some other individuals who oppose the government, see Egyptian presidential election, 2005, which had 9 opposition candidates. Picaroon9288 01:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

And yet the question still is flawed because it is framed as if all Egyptians had the same opinion. The question should be something like, "Are the majority ..." B00P 04:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Danish history

I'm researching Danish history for a novel I'm writing. Does anyone know what system of measurement was used in Denmark before the metric system. (I believe Denmark adopted the metric system around 1920, if that helps.) I'm specifically looking for the unit of measurement that would have been used for indicating the distance between towns, like the present day kilometer. Thanks! Lynne Jorgensen 01:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Have a look at Danish units of measurement. And good luck with your novel. Clio the Muse 01:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

You could check out the Danish version, too, and try to find other sources. The word "palme" for "palm of hand" seems slightly improbable, since Danish uses the word "håndflade". 惑乱 分からん 03:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Fabulous! This is exactly what I needed! Thanks! Lynne Jorgensen 04:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

How long is a 288-year prison sentence?

Creationist and tax evader Kent Hovind may face a sentence of up to 288 years in prison. This reminded me that I've always wondered about why people are given sentences longer than a lifespan. For Kent Hovind, then, what does this mean in practical terms? If sentenced to 288 years, will he inevitably serve for life? Is he likely to be released for good behaviour or something instead, and how soon might this happen? (How long will we be free of him?) --Grace 06:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

A sentence of that length would indeed mean that he would be imprisoned for his natural life, without possibility of parole. Unless, of course, he has a lifespan of Old Testament proportions? Clio the Muse 06:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

There are a few reasons to impose such long sentences:

• To counter the tendency to give "time off for good behavior". The percentage that a sentence can be reduced varies by jurisdiction, but can be 75% off in some cases. So, that would lower it to a 72 year sentence.

• Such sentences are typically the result of multiple convictions. For example, if there were 72 counts of 4 years each, that would total 288 years. Judges are sometimes given leeway to decide if multiple sentences are served concurrently or sequentially, giving them enormous power to vary the sentence.

• In the case of multiple convictions, it is possible to have some convictions overturned, and others upheld, so the large number of years may be needed to keep the person in prison after appeals.

Failing to give such long sentences can have disastrous consequences, as in the case of Coral Eugene Watts, a serial killer who was almost released. StuRat 07:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

That's an excellent explaination. I've always wondered why they gave someone a 7.5 life sentences, but I never looked it up since the law is very ambiguous in some aspects, thus lawyers exist. But now it makes somewhat more sense. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 07:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• In this case, we're talking US federal sentencing. There's no parole, and good behavior time is limited to about 15%. Are there mandatory minimums for these crimes? --jpgordon 15:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

This truly is a sad day. With Hovind locked away we will no longer get such gems as:

What a riot--Fuhghettaboutit 09:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Is there a question in here somewhere or does this somehow relate to the previous question ? StuRat 10:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

It's not a question, it's a desperate plea for sanity in this insane world. Try reading Kent Hovind, then come back with some specific questions. ;-) Anchoress 10:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes indeed Stu, that was related to the last question--which was about the infamous Kent Hovind; evolution gadfly; Yogi Bera's creationist doppelganger. Just read those quotes. You couldn't make this stuff up. Anchoress, you sound like a big fan ;-)--Fuhghettaboutit 11:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

The last question wasn't on Kent Hovind, per se, but was about excessive prison sentences. Kent was only used as an example. StuRat 18:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe he is. Who wouldn't be? "They were so desperate to find missing links, so desperate to prove their theory that they murdered people to prove it." I'd only been up for 20 minutes, yet I got my first laugh of the day. --Bowlhover 15:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

And my post wasn't obviously a comment related to that question referencing that specific individual, even if tangential? And a discussion of the degree of attenuation is useful how? Another words, why are we discussing this?--Fuhghettaboutit 19:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I thoroughly enjoyed the quotes, so thank you. :) And thanks everyone for the real answers too. --Grace 22:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Its so if he is cleared of some of his convictions, he may still be serving a life sentence on the others, i.e. if someone killed 2 people, was given 2 life sentences, you wouldnt want him released to early for being cleared of one of them. Philc _TC 21:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Secretary of Defense

Me and a friend have a bet I hope you guys can help us settle. Is the US Secretary of Defense in the chain of command of the US military? As in, if the Secretary starts ordering the generals around, are they obligated to obey his orders, or what?

Apparently, yes. Our article on Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff touches on this topic, though our article on the United States Secretary of Defence doesn't say this explicitly. See also National Command Authority, which deals with the situation where a nuclear weapons launch is called for - that both the Secretary of Defense and the President must give the order for them to be used (even though the constitutionality of such a rule is actually a bit dubious). --Robert Merkel 10:37, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

STUDENT COUNCIL HELP 2

Help! (again) the last time I was here I posted this question. . .

Where can I find some ideas and slogans for elementary type elections. He needs to find a slogan for his election posters. Thank You

PS: Make sure that the slogans are age approriate. G and PG only --Devol4 20:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Rhyming is usually important if you're in elementary school (or if you're Jesse Jackson). What's his first name (so we can suggest a nice rhyming slogan) ? StuRat 23:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

You might find some ideas at slogan.--Shantavira 10:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

His first name is Daniel and he is Runnig for 5th grade represenative. If you can come up with a slogan it will help so much. THANKS Chris

If he goes by "Dan", there's always "Vote for Dan, he's the man !". "Daniel" is a bit harder, we could go with "Vote for Daniel, the man you'll pick !". Try some like that, and keep them short enough to remember. StuRat 18:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

"Vote for Daniel, da dawg's no Cocker Spaniel!" ;) 惑乱 分からん 19:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

THANKS VERY MUCH WAKURAN

Peace out Chris

Alright! You're welcome... Glad you liked it! ;D 惑乱 分からん 20:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Instead of focusing on slogans, perhaps it would be a wise idea to focus on the qualities of the people that are running. --Proficient 02:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, this is fifth grade. I wouldn't expect him to be digging up his opponent's voting record ;) -Elmer Clark 02:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Country Music Awards

Who make up the Board of Directors of the American Country Music Awards...who determines who is nominated for an award?

according to their website it's these folks. Dina 23:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

This page explains how the nominations and voting is handled. It is a bit complicated (vote for five in each category on second ballot) and not limited top the boardmembers. Rmhermen 18:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson

is it true that he will launch his own makeup line? --Cosmic girl 16:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

If so, wouldn't you think he would have done so in time for Halloween ? StuRat 18:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Headshot! -- Chris 19:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Maybe he'll do it in time for Christmas, or New Year. (However, that link I gave was from October 2005. So the webpage says that he'll launch it by the end of 2005, not 2006.) --Bowlhover 18:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe next year? --Proficient 02:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

aww, I hope he does =(...--Cosmic girl 15:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Canadian Play

I'm looking for a canadian play about nature, I can't seem to find one. -74.12.101.207 20:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Start looking here: List of Canadian playwrights. I saw one by David Young that takes place in an ice cave. Anchoress 20:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

racial origins of the Devil

All the images I remember seeing of the Devil seem to be a dark, swarthy Caucasian (Italo-Spanish type or Arab/Semite). Why is this?, and are there any more modern depictions in the West of blond & blue-eyed, black or Asian devils? Also, do Fundamentalist Christians think the Devil really exists and can take form on Earth, and if so do they always see a Robert De Niro look-a-like or visualize the above-mentioned variations too? Thanks, ==Robert==

There is a long history of turning your real enemies (or people you just don't like much) into fantastical or imaginary enemies but perhaps equating them with the devil is just too big a compliment. The devil is often portrayed as more bestial then human with maybe only his/her minions being swarthy type. Here is a good book of cultural depictions. I would say that there has been a tendency to shift evil from looking obviously evil to being more sly and subtle with evil being thought of as "just like us". Modern devilish depictors I can recall include Harvey Keitel, Peter Cook, Elizabeth Hurley and Al Pacino MeltBanana 22:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Lucifer in DC Comics is depicted as blond and blue-eyed, which I believe was started by Neil Gaiman's Sandman series. Hardly an orthodox source, but to me it sort of makes sense because Lucifer was one of the most beautiful angels before the Fall, and other angels are often depicted as blond and blue-eyed. I'm sorry I don't have any other answers for you. --Grace 22:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Does the Devil belong to a race? No more, I would have thought, than any other divine or semi-divine concept. If he does belong to a race it's the race of angels; and how does one depict them? If you take the concept back to source you will find that he is given no physical description in any of the scared texts, Hebrew, Christian or Muslim. It isn't until the Middle Ages that he takes on a physical form, borrowed, in large measure, from the ancient pagan divinities, most notably Dionysis and the Great God Pan. As we move towards the modern age he inevitably metamorphoses into that which people fear most, in political, cultural or racial terms. And as far as angels being blond and blue-eyed that is also a very modern, and culturally specific concept. If the ancient Hebrews had ever attempted to depict such transcendental figures-which they never did-the one thing we can be sure of is that they would not have been seen in such a Nordic guise. Clio the Muse 00:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

See also, Fallen angel. The statue depicting Lucifer (1878) by Ricardo Bellver in Retiro Park in Spain, depicts a very "angelic" Satin (i.e. without any "racial" specifics, he looks like a healthy strong European), in line with the mythos of Dante and other earlier Christian and non-Christian concepts. --Cody.Pope 01:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Race implies continuation of a species and reproduction, which applies only to animate beings with bodies. Satan, according to the scriptures, is an immortal spiritual being. We can't visualise spiritual beings such as God, angels and devils, so we attribute human forms to them to make the task easier. But that's just our own construct; they don't have bodies. This is also why it's so hard for most people to accept that it's not the case that we ourselves are human beings who have occasional spiritual experiences, but rather, we are immortal spiritual beings who are currently having a temporary human experience. JackofOz 01:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Slightly off topic, but may I suggest that the difficulty of visualising immortal spiritual beings is not the only reason why it's 'so hard for most people to accept that ... we are immortal spiritual beings who are currently having a temporary human experience'? There are also rather a lot of arguments for the position that there are no such beings. Cheers, Sam Clark 09:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Ballot questions

I cannot find anything at all that explains to me what ballot questions (or whatever they may be called) really are or how they come to be included on the ballot. If laws are voted on by legislators, why then once every couple years are random questions included on the ballot for the general public to pass into law? Do all states do ballot questions? If anyone at all could clarify this for me or elaborate on the process/idea of ballot questions, I'd appreciate it! Also, if you have a good source/website that explains it, include that too. All my Google searches give are news about the actual ballot questions for this Tuesday. → JARED   22:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Our article on this topic is Referendums. You might also check out Initiative and referendum and History of direct democracy in the United States. Some U.S. states (mainly in the west) make it easier to get these questions on the ballot than do others. Typically, an interest group (with an interest in the question to be put on the ballot) has to collect a certain number of signatures to qualify their question for the ballot. Sometimes the groups sponsoring questions are grassroots citizen's groups, but because of the expense of collecting signatures (which often involves paying people to stand outside supermarkets and collect them), they are often sponsored by industry groups. Marco polo 23:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Which is ironic, because I&R was originally a Progressive Era reform to try to give power to "the people" at the expense of the organize interests thought to control state legislatures. A short answer to your questions: Generally, ballot questions are put on the ballot through the initiative process Marco Polo mentions, or are put on the ballot after passing the legislature because the state constitution requires it. For example, a tax increase or change to the state constitution might require voter approval. You can visit the site of the Initiative and Referendum Institute for more information. -- Mwalcoff 01:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Some states have non-binding referenda, while others have binding proposals (meaning it becomes law if passed). StuRat 01:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

When did winking originate?

On the subject of winking...when did it start? Is this something that has been around for longer than we have records of?

I became intrigued on this subject because in my English class, we watched a production of The Taming of the Shrew where at the very end, Kate winks to show that her whole little speech about how women should be subservient to men wasn't what she truly thought.

It's not written into the script, so I was wondering not only if this sort of body language existed when Shakespeare's plays were originally being performed, but also at what time winking actually started. =) --chickenflicker 22:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Was this a movie or a stage production? If you think about Shakespeare's original productions in Elizabethan theatres, like the Globe, a wink would simply have been lost on most of the audience, too far from the stage to pick it up. To be honest with you I think this is a question without an answer, a little akin to when did frowning or scowling or any other form of expression or cultural gesture start? Clio the Muse 00:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Live audience, taped for television. I was thinking that my question wouldn't be able to be answered as well, but perhaps hoping that winking was perhaps a gesture like shaking hands, which has some sort of known origin, or at least a few theories about its origin. chickenflicker 02:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

The Taming of the Shrew has often been regarded as a problematic play in modern times, because headstrong Kate, one of Shakespeare's most memorable heroines, is apparently completely subjugated by the end. I've been involved in productions of the play and its not just a problem "politically" it's also a problem dramatically because there's really not a clear explanation in the play of how or why she changes so thoroughly -- it gets sort of rushed at the end. Several modern directors have made the choice (in one way or another, sometimes more subtley than a wink) to imply at the end that either: a)Kate is faking it and will return to her old behaviour soon or b) she and Petruchio have developed a relationship of equals and she is pretending to be subjugated to help him win the wager. Either way, nothing of the sort is definitively there in the original text and it's all left to interpretation. So regardless of whether or not winking existed in Shakespeare's time, it's highly unlikely it would have been a part of the production. However, I have a vague memory of some other winking occurring in a Shakespeare (though I can't remember where) which would come closer to answering your question. ;) Dina 01:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

From Cymbeline a play I'm not terribly familiar with:

Posthumus.

I tell thee, fellow, there are none want eyes to

direct them the way I am going, but such as wink and

will not use them.

First Gaoler.'

What an infinite mock is this, that a man should

have the best use of eyes to see the way of

blindness! I am sure hanging's the way of winking.

Dina 02:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, from one of Shakespeare's contemporary's (mocking the audience of his plays): You will see such heaving and shoving, such itching and shouldering to sit by the women, such care for their garments that they be not trod on . . . such toying, such smiling, such winking, such manning them home ... that it is a right comedy to mark their behaviour" (Stephen Gosson, "The School of Abuse", 1579). (emphasis mine) Dina 02:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Pretty helpful information, about winking in Shakespeare's other work. I had watched a 1976 performance which was in front of a live audience, but taped for television, so, to me, the wink was pretty obvious, but to those who were in the back row during the original taping...I don't know how they would have seen it. chickenflicker 02:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea how it originated, but winking is mentioned half a dozen time in the Bible, e.g. Job 15:12, Psalms 35:19.--Shantavira 10:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Metternich's views on University professors and private property

Many years ago I saw Metternich (Prince Klemens von Metternich) quoted as having said that he could not stand university professors because none of them had any respect for private property. Is there any source to substantiate this, or any similar comment? (I do not need anything on his general views, or his measures,-- such as the Carlsbad decrees,-- on Universities, students, professors, censorship, and so on.) Many thanks, Stephen Scott.

I do not know of such a quotation, and there is very little in Misplaced Pages itself which might be of assistance to you: the page on Metternich is, to be blunt, far from satisfactory. As far as I am aware the chief thrust of his policy in the area of education was to restrict-or eliminate-the perpetuation of socially harmful doctrines, like constitutionalism, republicanism, liberalism and nationalism. As far as the sanctity of private property is concerned I would have assumed that the views of most professors would not have been that be that far removed from those of Metternich himself. Clio the Muse 23:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Dear Clio,-- Many thanks for responding with your thoughts. Indeed, private property is par excellence an institution as to which sympathetic opinion can straddle the political spectrum between autocrats, aristocrats, gentry, and the bourgeoisie. I do remember once seeing some opinion, along the lines of that which I quoted, attributed to Metternich, and I posted my query on the odd chance that someone amongst the many sophisticated readers just might happen to recognize it. And I venture to add that, in my experience, academics are not, as a class, typically the staunchest defenders of property rights. (On the subject of property and economic liberalism, I am also fond of the remark often attributed to Guizot,-- even if perhaps at least partly apocryphal,-- "Bourgeois, enrichissez vous!" (It is taken up elsewhere on this website.) Thanks again, Stephen Scott.

You're welcome, Stephen. Sorry I was not able to be of greater assistance. Clio the Muse 03:15, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

November 6

S.M.O.M.

Here's a question I haven't been able to answer by reading the Misplaced Pages article. A few months ago, I saw a program on The History Channel, which explained about S.M.O.M. (Sovereign Military Order of Malta). It is, according to the program, the smallest country on earth, and is located in Rome (like the Vatican). This is what Misplaced Pages has to say, but it doesn't even say it's a country. I know it exists, because they even gave the adress and showed license plates; besides, the History Channel wouldn't lie (would they?). No one believes the existance of such a place, and to convice people, I have to repeat everything in the program, while I would normally just cite Misplaced Pages. I'd apreciate help. Thanks | AndonicO Talk 01:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Our article does not say it is a country, because it isn't a country. SMOM claims sovereignty under international law and "has been granted permanent observer status at the United Nations. (Its claims of sovereignty are disputed by some scholars.) ... However, unlike the Holy See, which is sovereign over the Vatican City, SMOM has no sovereign territory since the loss of the island of Malta in 1798. The United Nations does not classify it as a "non-member state" but as one of the "entities and intergovernmental organizations having received a standing invitation to participate as observers"." Until and unless other states recognise SMOM as a sovereign nation like the Vatican City, it is wrong to claim that it is "the smallest country on earth", or indeed, a country at all. JackofOz 02:03, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Wow, interesting. I believe that Vatican City is still regarded as the smallest independent nation on earth, but I found this (randomly online here:)

The S.M.O.M. is an ancient organization founded under the aegis of the Roman Catholic church during the Crusades to protect pligrims on their way to the Holy Land. It now functions as a Catholic charitable organization (running a number of hospitals throughout the world), and enjoys limited diplomatic status as a "sovereign entity", complete with passports, coinage (via the world's smallest national mint), license plates (via a special contract with the Italian government), an (unofficial) amateur radio license prefix (1A0) and a post office (Postage stamps are a major source of income). The S.M.O.M. headquarters, consisting of a building and courtyard in Rome, Italy, is officially the world's smallest self-governing sovereign territory (roughly twice the size of a standard tennis court, small enough to have a mailing address*), and exchanges ambassadors and diplomatic representatives with over 80 countries.

To quote the website: "After the loss of the island of Malta, the Order settled permanently in Rome, Italy, in 1834. Its two headquarters, granted with extraterritoriality, are the Palazzo Malta in Via dei Condotti 68 - where the Grand Master resides and Government Bodies meet - and the Villa Malta on the Aventine. The latter hosts the Grand Priory of Rome, the Embassy of the Order to the Holy See and the Embassy of the Order to the Italian Republic."

On August 24, 1994, the S.M.O.M was granted Permenant Observer Status in the United Nations, allowing them to participate in the discussions of the U.N. General Assembly.

It wouldn't serve as a good source for a Misplaced Pages article, and the link it provides is to a website in Italian. But I think you might be somewhat right -- the distinction is is whatever the difference between the "world's smallest self-governing entity" and "the world's smallest independent nation." I expect the distinction is important somehow. Cheers. Dina 02:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

If you look at Knights Hospitalers#International Status of the Order you will see that the order does not claim to be a 'country', but a 'sovereign entity', quite a different concept altogether. It enjoys a certain extra-territorial status in the Vatican City, but has no direct authority. The status is a residue from the time the Knights controlled Rhodes and then Malta. The Order exists in international law a little like a 'government in exile'; though this is purely honorary and formalist in practice Clio the Muse 02:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Well there it is, serves me right for going straight to google...Dina 02:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

This is all very interesting, but would being a sovereign entity make it a government? And would a government with some territory be regarded as a country? | AndonicO Talk 11:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

No, and no. No large tract of land, no country. Citing the Vatican as a country just shows it is mislabelled due to clout, and should not be considered a country either. Edison 14:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Ice age?

Someone told me that the pentagon was interested in the results of a report about an upcoming ice age. The thermohalen conveyer is supposedly going to stop, and create another ice age. The person who told me heard this on the radio, so they didn't get the name of the report. As in the question I asked a section above, I saw this on TV (The Science Channel), so it's a scientific possibility. I'd like the name of the report if possible. Thank you! | AndonicO Talk 01:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

If the Pentagon is preparing for an Ice Age it is clearly, and perhaps typically, moving in the opposite direction from the rest of the human race. Clio the Muse 02:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what the report was named, but you might want to look at Thermohaline circulation. And from what I've heard, Europe may well see significant cooling after enough ice in Greenland melts. The fresh water flowing into the northern Atlantic might stop the global ocean currents that bring warm water north to Europe, which keep the continent warmer than it would be otherwise. Maybe ask your question at the science reference desk. Philbert 05:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I'll ask the question over there too. | AndonicO Talk 11:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Lambiam gave me a good link at the Science Reference desk. Shutdown of thermohaline circulation It's close enough to what I wanted, thank you too. | AndonicO Talk 13:03, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

India Export Tax

Where can I find articles regarding export tax of India on Portland Cement? Do they have an export tax? --Transit1 02:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Export taxes are one of the stupidest taxes ever invented, I would think India would be smarter than that. They just damage their own industry, exports, and economy. Import taxes, on the other hand, can help protect native industries. StuRat 05:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually stu, I have to disagree. Export taxes do have their use, because selling in the foreign becomes more expensive selling in the homecountry somewhat more interesting. usually this also discourages the settlement of low-wage factories which usually are BAD for the health standard of a country. also the extra effect is that the production of cement in this case which is pretty highly polluting (at least with the techniques used in india). Graendal 06:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, that makes no sense. They should aim to sell in both foreign AND domestic markets. Cutting off one market won't help the other. As for environmental protection, the way to do that is with tough environmental protection laws, not by destroying industry. That way, if it's possible to produce cement without breaking the laws, they will, and if not, they will go out of business. StuRat 14:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, it's not the presence of low-wage jobs that are bad for the people, it's the absence of high-wage jobs. Adding low-wage jobs to an economy never hurts anything, unless it comes at the cost of high-wage jobs, and there's no reason to think that high-wage jobs would be destroyed by exporting goods. If anything, a few high-wage jobs should be created (engineering, etc.). StuRat 14:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Catholic response to Calvinism

Are there any specific Catholic documents that contain reactions or refuations of Calvinism? (paticualry the 5 Points of Calvinism)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.6.163.95 (talk • contribs)

To begin with have a look over the page on the Counter Reformation. If you do not find some general outlines there we can try some finer tuning. You should also read the page on John Calvin. The chief Catholic accusation against Calvinism seems to be that innovation in theology inevitably leads to degeneration and moral decay. Clio the Muse 07:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget that the Reformation got going with Martin Luther in 1517, year before Calvin entered the fray.Edison 14:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Pish posh. There are dozens of attacks on Calvin from other Protestant churches as well as from the Roman Catholic Church. The chief Church of England counter came in Richard Hooker's Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, but the main attacks were on the extreme form of Augustinianism that Calvin endorsed and what the English theologians called "enthusiasm" or "phrenzy," which they had a great deal of trouble with. Direct inspiration and the rejection of theology set the Calvinists in England directly at odds with every other group, including the "Independents" (Baptists) and Quakers. Remember: Calvinist in England = Puritain. Geogre 18:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Children

If there was a child who starred in a movie that was rated R, would they be permitted to watch the movie?

If you're referring to the U.S. "R" rating, yes but being in the film isn't required. Any child under 17 years of age can watch an R rated movie so long as they have a parent or guardian accompanying them. Dismas| 05:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

What about a film under the Australian "R" rating, where you do have to be 18 or over to see it? --Grace 11:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

An "R" rated movie is not generally a collection of scenes all of which are "R" rated. Remember that someone could be "in" a movie and only be in very innocuous scenes, and never see anything controversial during the filming, so there is no sense in which they wold have already seen the scenes which generate the "R" rating. Edison 14:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Compulsive Lying

me and my mates are finding it impossible to remember the single word term for a compujlsive liar. can you help us?

It's called Mythomania. Next time, make sure you make a "new question" when you ask it. The link is at the top of the page. ;) --AstoVidatu 04:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I would have though that the more standard expression would be Pathological liar. Clio the Muse 09:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Clothing and housing in 13th century Christian Spain

What clothing was worn in 13th century Spain, and what types of houses were built? Mo-Al 04:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Have a trawl through the History of Western fashion. You will find some general category indicators at the bottom of the page. However, a word of caution: beware of illustrations of 'typical' fashions. You will find that they are anything but typical, showing only what the more affluent would be able to wear. Most of the peasantry and urban poor would use the most basic forms of clothing, usually a simple gown, shirt and doublet, if even that. Housing is more problematic, and will range from castles to hovels, hovels being more typical, but less enduring, than castles. Medieval Spain is little different in this regard from the rest of Europe. Clio the Muse 08:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, our article on the history of Western fashion doesn't go back any further than the 16th century. However, here are a few web sources on fashion from the 13th century: this from About.com, this from a site of uncertain reliability, and this from a site endorsed by the Annenberg foundation. The Annenberg site also has a section on housing. Clothing was probably fairly similar across Europe, with greater differences between classes than between regions. Peasants tended to wear rough woolen hose and tunics. Nobles wore finer and more colorful woolens, more linen, fur, jewelry, and perhaps some silk. Housing, on the other hand, would have varied from region to region depending on materials available locally. Peasant housing was often built of wattle and daub, though in Spain, adobe was often used. Peasant cottages typically had thatched roofs and only one room, with perhaps an attached stall for animals (though in one-room cottages, animals often slept with the family). Noble's manor houses were more often built with timber framed walls and slate roofs. Marco polo 14:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

An odd question for The Stranger

First, I'll admit, this is a homework question. I have read The Outsider (English translation of The Stranger, by Albert Camus), and I have a bunch of questions to answer. This particular question is: "Is Meursault a 'person'? (a human person, a true individual, to be contrasted with a cliché, a stereotype or one sadly reduced to common sense)." What do you think this is asking for? How should I go about answering it? What I'm thinking right now is to say Meursault is more a metaphor than a real person... but that seems a bit weak. Thanks much in advance! 154.20.206.99 08:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Read over, but please do not reproduce (it is too obvious!) the article on The Stranger (novel). As a character Meursault is real enough, but he suffers from the weakness of all novels written to illustrate a point in philosophy-he appears little better than an epiphenomenon, rather than a complete human being. The best kind of novel should convince you that the character exists independently, if you like, from the author's creative imagination. Meursault does not. He only exists to give life to Camus' notion of the absurd, and becomes, in himself, 'absurd' in more senses than the author intended. I once heard Camus described as the 'bargain basement of modern literature'. I can provide no better summary than that. Clio the Muse 09:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, not bargain basement, though flat, of course. Absurdist literature has at least the advantage of wanting characters to be transparently fictive and philosophical (Beckett's plays, Brecht's "Epic Theater"), but Camus isn't part of the absurdist literary movement, despite ostensibly being a founder of it (just as Pirandello cannot manage to be unbelievable). That said, Camus's novel has some virtues. Many have found its sense of isolation and disenfranchisement intriguing (though I never did), and, on the completely other hand, he makes it easy to reject absurdism by pointing out the actual implications of an Absurdist life. (He showed how bankrupt the philosophy was, if you put it into action, in other words.) If one wants a philosopher novelist with some believability or usefulness, I'd recommend Hesse. Geogre 18:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

A few interest rates questions

Wasn't really sure where to put an economics question...but seeing as economics is meant to be a 'social science' and 'society' is listed in the humanities desk...figured this was the best place to try.

1. Basically, i've got in my economics textbook that "A common 'rule of thumb' is that monetary policy should be tightened when nominal interest rates are lower than nominal GDP growth".

Why? I figured if nominal interest rates were lower than nominal GDP growth, then people would have little incentive to save, since they'd get more return from investing than interest from saving. That would mean increased aggregate demand, since investment is a component of it, which leads to inflation. So therefore, increased interest rate would be the logical thing to do since increasing interest rate reduces consumption and investmnet, therefore reducing aggregate demand, therefore cooling inflation. Is this the only reason?

2. I've got, in the same book, that "if nominal interest is zero and inflation is below zero, there is a negative rate of real interest."

I don't really understand this. For a start, real interest is nominal interest minus inflation. So if nominal interest is zero and inflation is below zero, then shouldn't the real interest be above zero? Since zero minus a negative number gives you a positive number.

Also, i don't really see how it would work. Let's just say the economy is deflating at 2% (so an inflation rate of negative 2), and i have a $100 bill in my hand. If i just hold onto it, i'd still have a $100 bill in my hand one year later. If i put it into a bank at 0% interest, i'd also end up with just a 100$ bill after one year. Of course, after a year, the 100$ is worth more because things are becoming cheaper, but whether i hold on to it or if i put it into a bank at 0% interest, i'd end up with the same.

I admit this is sort of a homework question. For the record, i've already (tried) reading the relevant articles here, and they really haven't helped much. Would really appreciate it if anyone could enlighten me here. --`/aksha 10:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I think Science would be the right place to post this. On number 1, you seem to have figured it out on your own. An overheated economy can lead to an oversupply of goods and satiated demand, causing a recession or even a depression, so it's best to "put the brakes on" before this happens. I agree with you on number 2, they made a mistake. StuRat 14:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

(After edit conflict) I do not claim to be an expert, but I would say to your question #1: The reason that you have given is the main reason for keeping interest rates at or above the rate of nominal GDP growth. Another reason is that low interest rates can cause destabilizing asset inflation. As for your question 2., I agree with StuRat that you are correct and your textbook is in error. Marco polo 14:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Which congressional district is Tucson AZ in?

I'm English, try not to bite me for asking.

I cant find out on the pages for the 7th or 8th Districts, or page for Tucson (at least not definitively). I think the city is split in two amongst the 7th and 8th districts although it is hard to tell from low res maps. Please help. --Amists 13:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

You are correct that Tucson is split between those two districts. The city center is in the 7th District, while the more affluent residential areas to the north and east are in the 8th District. Here is a more detailed map of the district boundaries in Tucson. Marco polo 14:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

You are awesome. Exactly what I wanted :) I'll edit Tucson incase anyone else ever wants to know. --Amists 14:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Hypothetical Senate Trial of Nixon

As we all know Nixon resigned the presidency on August 9th, 1974, even before being impeached by the House, not to mention conviction by the Senate. Impeachment by the House was pretty much a certainty. I'm curious though about what the article calls his "probable" conviction by the Senate.

First off, given the timing of his resignation (just three months before a midterm election), should impeachment proceedings drag on a few months, which Senate (1972 or 1974) would preside over the conviction proceedings? In either case, by implication, according to Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution, only 34 of the 100 sitting Senators would be enough to block any guilty verdict. I realize that even among Republicans Senators, he lost a great deal of support. I'm just wondering if any research has been done as to the likely vote of each Senator, (be it the '72 or the '74 Senate,) and how close it is speculated that Nixon would have come to the "magic number" of 34. Any thoughts or references would be appreciated. Thanks! Oh, an by the way, please forgive me for forgetting to mention that the jurisdiction I'm referring to is the United States of America. :) Loomis 17:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Spanish History 1010

Hi,

can anyone please tell me what happened in Spanish history in the year 1010? Thanks!

Try here History of Spain or 1010. Dina 19:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Need Metal Band Name

My friend needs some help looking for a name for his black metal band. It should be or at least sound Egyptian, Babylonian, or Persian and preferrably based on a myth cycle of some sort. Any suggestions? Thanks.

I know the Admins will spank me for answering with a joke, but I can't help, upon hearing the terms "Metal Band" and "Egyptian" to suggest "The Bangles". Oh well, the name's already been used. Sorry guys, for the joke answer, I promise to never do it again, except under exceptional circumstances. Loomis 18:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I have a suggestion: Use Misplaced Pages to find a name. There are many articles you may be interested in, such as Ancient Egypt, Babylonia, and Persia. --Kainaw 18:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Another US Constitutional Question

While I'm at it, I might as well ask this one. In the run-up to the 2000 election, I remember watching a Conan O'Brien spoof where this Clinton impersonator outlined his strategy at getting around the two-term limit of the 22nd Amendment. Reading it carefully, it only forbids one from being "elected to the office of the President" more than twice. His "plan" was to get onto the Gore ticket as candidate for Vice-President. Gore would then immediately resign, then, pursuant to the 25th Amendment, Clinton would be sworn in as President, and essentially be allowed to serve a third term. In fact, he could even go so far as nominate Gore as his VP, and with Congress' confirmation, we'd essenially have yet another four years of a Clinton-Gore administration! Of course it was meant as an absurd joke, but poring carefully over the words of the 22nd Amendment, it actually seems like, technically at least, the ridiculous plan would actually be Constitutionally legal. Am I missing something? If not, I may actually consider giving Karl Rove a call! I'm joking of course, I hope that last line hasn't caused any of you to suffer any serious psychological trauma. :--)

On a more serious note, the 25th Amendment, describing, inter alia, how upon the removal, death or resignation of the President, the VP becomes President. Yet this Amendment was only ratified in '67, four years after JFK's assination and LBJ's swearing in. Without this particular Amendment, what was the Constitutional basis for automatically assuming that LBJ, or Truman for that matter, or even those VPs further back in history who were sworn in as President upon the death of the sitting President were the obvious successors? Loomis 18:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

• Article II Section 1: In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected. The 25th Amendment article does describe why that first section is needed: does "shall devolve on" mean "take over the job"? --jpgordon 18:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks JP. I should have gone over the article more thoroughly before asking. It just threw me off that the 25th Amendment seems to introduce a concept that had been practiced routinely beforehand. It hadn't occured to me that it could merely be clarification of previously existing text in the main body of the Constitution. Still, though, as the article states, the concept became pretty clear as far back as when John Tyler succeeded William Henry Harrison upon the latter's death. Even moreso ever since Teddy Roosevelt's succession upon the death of William McKinley, and as I've mentioned, the cases of Truman and LBJ. The section would seem be rather redundant, given all the precedent set, and akin to passing an Amendment authorizing the courts to excercize judicial review, a function they've been excercizing without explicit Constitutional authority ever since the precedent was set in Marbury v. Madison. On the other hand, if it helps to clarify things, even unnecessarily, I suppose there's no harm. Loomis 19:15, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

The Veil Controversy

Whats the whole debate regarding the veil made such a big issue around the world?

Whose freedom is being questioned? The west or the religion? Or Is there some element of choice in the religion? Or is the world slaves of freedom and western democracy where there is no rationality of thought and the West is imposing its way of life as a compulsion on the east ?

Or is the east under a compulsion to accept the age of plastic surgery and nip tuck?? ~~

• Misplaced Pages Reference Desk archive