Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

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

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

January 6

UN Deputy Secretary-General, pre-1997?

I've left a query on the Talk page for United Nations Deputy Secretary-General. An unsourced citation (elsewhere) cites that one Bogdan (or Bohdan) Lewandowski filled this position—or a similar one with a different title?—presumably during his tenure as Poland's Permanent Representative to the U.N. (1960-1966; dates culled from the Polish WP). I'd appreciate any help in confirming or otherwise clarifying (or refuting) this. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 10:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Good day to you! Seems that the information given in several different places indicates the Deputy Secretary-General is a new position. The United Nations Deputy Secretary-General page says the first person appointed to the post was Canada's Louise Fréchette. Before that, even the information on the UN's own website doesn't hint at it's existance. Operator873 (talk) 10:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

There are a number of under secretary generals at any given time covering various UN departments, and it seems Bohdan Lewandowski was one of these. There is a biography of him on this page (scroll down). Note that this is a different person from the Polish Wikipedia's Bogdan Lewandowski (b. 1946). --Cam (talk) 02:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Who wrote this?

Does anyone know who wrote this please?

"If there is a God, I don't think He would demand that anyone bow down or stand up to Him. I often have a suspicion that God is still trying to work things out and hasn't finished".

Many thanks--79.79.187.69 (talk) 11:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

FOUND IT NOW, Rebbeca West it was. --79.79.187.69 (talk) 11:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Resolved

First Play-writer

Can you tell me that who was the first play-writer in English Literature and from where did he/she belong? Also what was the name of his/her first play? many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.103.70.227 (talk) 12:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Probably we don't know. See Medieval theatre. A named dramatist who may be a better answer than none is John Skelton (c. 1460–1529), who wrote three plays, including Magnificence. John Bale (1495–1563) wrote an early historical verse drama on King John and c. 1538 a morality play with the memorable title Three Laws of Nature, Moses and Christ, corrupted by the Sodomytes, Pharisees and Papystes most wicked. See also Everyman (play). Strawless ^(talk) 14:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Medieval quasi-allegorical morality plays are the earliest. Two famous ones which were from an era after morality plays and before the Elizabethan theatre boom, and that were intended for actual popular theatrical performance (as opposed to being a purely written literary exercise or an esoteric aristocratic Court entertainment), are Gammer Gurtons Needle and Ralph Roister Doister... AnonMoos (talk) 20:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

And in terms of "firsts", Ralph Roister Doister is pretty well established as the first English comedy, though it postdates Bale's dramas. - Nunh-huh 07:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Christianity vs languages of Pakistan

Which languages do the Pakistanis Christians speak? Urdu? Pashto? Punjabi? Sindhi? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.30.202.22 (talk) 14:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

There are very likely Christians speaking every one of those languages. Christianity is a missionary religion, and spreading the religion "to the ends of the earth" (Acts 1:8 for anyone looking) is a central component of being a Christian. Jesus himself issued the Great Commission to all christians; Matthew 28:19 "Go and make disciples of all nations." Why do I bring all of this up? Because within any sizable language group, you are likely to find Christians among them. There are active Christian missionaries working among some languages with only a few thousand speakers; in ANY language where the speakers number in the millions, which all of the ones you list do, you are likely to find a sizable number of Christians among them. Depending on the culture and laws of the local nation, those Christians may worship underground to an extent; but they are certainly some there. This page lists some interesting statistics about Bible versions. According to that page, at least some portion of the Christian bible has been translated into over 2200 languages. This page claims complete translations into over 2000 languages, and "countless" partial translations. Nearly every site I can find at this google search comes up with a number somewhere between 2000 and 2400. Why do I bring all of this up? Because it is quite likely that there are practicing Christians speaking just about any language that is spoken by more than 1 million people, and likely for any language spoken by more than a few tens of thousands of people. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, actually, I find out that this Jehovah's Witnesses'this one It shows that the languages of Pakistanis are Pashto, Sindhi, Punjabi and Urdu. 192.30.202.22 (talk) 21:10, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, we do have an article Christianity in Pakistan... AnonMoos (talk) 14:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Christians vs. languages of India

Which languages do speak Indian Christians speak? Hindi? Bengali? Tamil? Telugu? Malayalam? Kannada? Gujarati? Punjabi? Oriya? Assamese? Marathi? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.30.202.22 (talk) 14:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

There are at least a few Christians speaking each of these languages. Christians in India are not confined to a single ethnic group. Marco polo (talk) 17:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, actually, I find out that this Jehovah's Witnesses'this one It shows that the languages of Indians are Assamese, Bengali, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannada, Malayalam Marathi, Oriya, Punjabi and Tamil. 192.30.202.22 (talk) 21:17, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

And least we forget, Portuguese. Why? Goa was a Portuguese enclave in India until 1961 and the majority of Goans spoke Portuguese and a majority were Christians. Many also spoke pretty good English and of course Hindi and Marathi. I lived in Bombay, now Mumbai, in the late sixties and experienced their diaspora. I suppose by now fewer speak Portuguese.67.85.139.112 (talk) 00:46, 11 January 2009 (UTC)Sasquatch

Pakistani hindus

Which languages do Pakistani Hindus speak? Punjabi? Sindhi? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.30.202.22 (talk) 15:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Some speak Punjabi, some speak Sindhi, and some speak other dialects. Marco polo (talk) 17:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

According to your articles "Punjabi People", Sindhi People", "Hindkowans" and "Saraiki People", they all say, in their little facts box, they have Hindu followers. 192.30.202.22 (talk) 21:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Russian lit: Killing a man to see his soul

In a novel or short story or play by a Russian author, a character is a soldier in the Russian army. In a battle he overpowers his enemy, then deliberately murders the man because, as he later puts it, he wanted to see if man has a soul. This scene does not take place as "live action" but is reported, either by the soldier himself or by someone who heard it from him.

What literary work contains the scene and who was the author?--Goodmorningworld (talk) 16:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

You might be thinking of Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor who was your original unfeeling scientist. Dmcq (talk) 19:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Nope, warn't him fer shur. But, thank you for pointing me to the delightful article on Frederick II, which I had not seen before. Confoundingly, that article is rated only C-Class, while others not half as good are Featured Articles – more proof of the inadequacy of Wikipedia's rating system.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 20:06, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It's C-Class (or Start-class for those projects not keen on this new-fangled C-class) because it lacks inline citations necessary to make B-Class or above. There's no way of knowing whether the delightful facts/prose are indeed true or just made up. Gwinva (talk) 01:15, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The Frederick II article doesn't describe the man in a cask experiment, it is described in Excerpt from the Chronicle of Salimbene on Frederick II which is referenced from the Salimbene di Adam article. I'll go and add it to the Frederick II one. Dmcq (talk) 07:00, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

By the way if you like Frederick you might like a more modern take on the same idea, see the references from the article on Gerry Nahum. Dmcq (talk) 08:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Crying Frenchman after Nazi victory

There's an iconic film of a Frenchman crying after the initial Nazi victory over France (or perhaps when Paris was occupied). He's standing up straight (I believe in a crowd) trying to keep composure although you can tell he's obviously very broken up inside. I've seen it dozens of times in various WWII documentaries. I was just wondering who this guy was and what his backstory was. 216.239.234.196 (talk) 20:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I found a still of the film. It's the second picture on this page [1]. Does anyone know his name or anything about him? 216.239.234.196 (talk) 20:48, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It appears to be an Associated Press photo. They include it among "some of its most famous photographs of World War II, as well as rarely seen pictures from its archives at [2]. The caption there says he is "standing among other residents of Marseilles" on February 19, 1941 "as he watches the flags of France's historic regiments depart into exile in North Africa." It is claimed by most other sites, including Wikipedia to be from the initial Nazi occupation of Paris, on June 14, 1940. Wikipedia also says, in Military history of France during World War II "A Frenchman weeps as German soldiers march into the French capital, Paris, on June 14, 1940. (This famous photograph is also said to have been taken as French troops were evacuating through Toulon.)." The source stated for the Wikipedia image is "Records of the Office of War Information, NARA." If AP owns the photo, they seem more credible. Most books at Google Book search say it is from the fall of Paris in 1940, but [3] says (p463)it is from Marseilles, February 1941, and credits Movietone News for permission. [4] credtid it to "NARA 535896" and says Paris 1940. My impression is it was really Marseilles 1941 and someone in the U.S. government got it wrong, because it tells a better story as the fall of Paris than perhaps an old soldier seeing his old unit's colors disgraced. When a print of it, made in 1948, sold at Sotheby's in 2002, they said " Frenchman weeping as French flags leave just ahead of Germans " which would correspond to Marseilles, but said it was originally photographed in 1940. A "circa 1960" UPI wire photo copy sold at auction in 2007 [5] said the photo was by "George Mejat" from 1940, taken in Marseilles, as the Nazis marched into the city, and that it was also a Fox Movietone newsreel. There is more discussion at Talk:Military history of France during World War II#Altering Caption of "Weeping Frenchman" Picture. Edison (talk) 21:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm doing a Google search and I'm coming up with some of the same things, but I didn't find the Marseilles thing or the Wikipedia discussion. Thanks! Note that the woman next to him is clapping. To me, it seems more likely that she'd clap for departing French troops than invading Germans but who knows. As far as the Wikipedia discussion goes, I find the comment that "it still doesn't make sense that a crowd was anywhere in Paris" to be a bit off. Paris wasn't evacuted, so there should have been enough people around to form a crowd should they choose to. (Of course, if it were me, I'd stay home with the doors locked and the shades pulled down.) I wonder why none of the editors (apparently) didn't try asking someone on the French version of Wikipedia. One of the French editors might know. 216.239.234.196 (talk) 21:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

For some reason, I'm remembering this as a LIFE magazine image. --Moni3 (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I have found the 1943 U.S propaganda film and compared the closest frame to the photo. The famous still is clearly from the movie. If it were a separate still photographer, he would have had to have his still camera lens less than 2 inches from the movie camera lens, given the geometry of the lines from the weeping Frenchman to the people behind him. The woman to weeping man's left is clapping. No one is giving a Nazi salute. It is not credible that this is a crowd welcoming/mourning the Nazis entry to Paris in 1940. It appears to be the French observing some French troops and their colors leaving France bound for North Africa, where French forces served after France fell. Vichy France under Petain were enthusiastic Nazi collaborators, but some of their forces in North Africa were more independent. When did the French troops/colors depart Marseilles/Toulon? What do the editors of French Wikipedia say about the man and the movie/photo? If it were from my hometown, living persons could identify the site, the occasion and many of the people. I expect no less from the French. My best guess: The "weeping Frenchman" was an army veteran and mourned the departure of the colors of his former unit, from Marseilles. Edison (talk) 06:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Late (but right) answer. This man is M. Jerôme Barzetti, photo in Marseille, La Canebière, at passage of flags of dismounted regiments, sent in Algeria, after collapse of France. Date: approximatively Feb.19, 1941, and published on 3.3.41 by Life' Magazine. (See: Marseille sous l'Occupation by Lucien Gaillard, Ouest France 1982, ISBN 2.85882.541.6, pp.12-13 - Lucien Gaillard writes "July 1940", p.11).

Sociology? Anthropology? or ?

Let's say I want to understand:

how is Japanese culture different from my culture?

and/or what are the core values of Thai culture? etc.

What branch of the humanities would this be? thanks, Sethie (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Ethnology / ethnography? Significant research was also done by anthropologists (eg Claude Levi-Strauss), cultural anthropologists (eg Margaret Mead) or linguists (Brothers Grimm). --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I recommend Area Studies. DOR (HK) (talk) 02:20, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

You should be aware that classic-style cultural comparisons between national cultures (one of the most famous of which was Ruth Benedict's The Chrysanthemum and the Sword) have kind of been out favor in academia in recent times... AnonMoos (talk) 03:04, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Several reasons for this uneasy and politically correct avoidance are expressed in the opening section of Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs and Steel, 1997, which explores the fundamental environmental shaping of traditional cultures. --Wetman (talk) 19:18, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks all! Sethie (talk) 21:13, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

January 7

Googly eyes?

I was wondering why they call those little arts and crafts eyes [6] googly eyes. When I searched on Wikipedia for it, it just brought me to Strabismus. And is there an alternate, more correct name for the eyes? Evaunit♥666♥ 03:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

That's all I've ever heard them called as well. And this would probably get a better response on the Language desk. Dismas|^(talk) 04:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Just an unsourced speculation: early cartoon strip character Barney Google ("..with the goo-goo-googly eyes / Barney Google / with the wife who's twice his size...") -- Deborahjay (talk) 05:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

See also [7]. Barney Google had "googley eyes." There is still a comic strip featuring Snuffy Smith which is the successor to "Barney Google and Snuffy Smith." I can't recall the year Google last showed up in the Smith comic strip. Edison (talk) 06:20, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The Oxford English Dictionary has no problem with the word "googly", giving it a main entry without comment. What etymology there is is fuzzy and convoluted, but it seems to go back to "goggle" and the unattested "gog", a word "expressive of oscillating movement", not unlike "jog" or "joggle". So to call those notions "googly eyes" is actually quite correct, employing the core sense of the word. Thanks, by the way; I hadn't known they were called that. --Milkbreath (talk) 15:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks guys : ] long live googlism!!! Evaunit♥666♥ 03:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

E1 transaction

i have come across E1-transaction (may be i am late know about it) regarding excise duty payment. After browsing the net i found a few references related to E1-transactions of insurance policies of medical treatment for patients. Will any one elucidate me about E1-transactions related to Excise duty and other commercial taxes please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jatilau (talk • contribs) 04:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

whaling

I recently heard of a show called Whale Wars (it's not wars between whales, which would be a totally different show)

hearing about this has me wondering:

Is whaling legal in Japan? For that matter, are laws governing the killing of endangered species mandated in any way OTHER than country by country?

If whaling is legal in Japan--how do these protesters get away with infringing on the japanese right to whale? Protesting is one thing, but it sounds like they're forcibly trying to stop them207.172.70.176 (talk) 05:29, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

On the first part of the question, see whaling and in particular whaling#Japan_2, and International Whaling Commission. On the second part, I don't know the specifics of these protests, but governments that don't want to be seen as authoritarian sometimes don't like to prosecute illegal activities that they see as not too serious and that are part of a bona fide protest. (On the other hand, some governments seem to go out of their way to treat protests as illegal.) Curiously, I don't see anything in either the protest, right to protest, or direct action articles that directly addresses that question of reluctance to prosecute. --Anonymous, 06:17 UTC, January 7, 2009.

Whaling has a real PR problem, and arresting protesters just gets more media attention, which might lead to a public outcry for changing the laws to ban whaling. Therefore, they may decide the best way to continue whaling is to ignore the protesters. StuRat (talk) 07:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

There are plenty of legitimate protests that try to forcibly stop a government-sanctioned practice that the protesters think is wrong (e.g., illegally forcing white diners to share a lunch counter with a negro). See civil disobedience. --Sean 12:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Here's a recent article that discusses Japanese response to anti-whaling protestors, which you might find interesting [8]. Note that the Japanese 'harvest' whales under international rules that permit this for research purposes. Apparently the Japanese are still conducting vital research into why the whales die when harpooned, skinned and gutted. 161.181.153.10 (talk) 18:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Koan: Flax or hemp?

Is it possible that the Koan that describes Buddha as "three pounds of flax" was a mistranslation, and that "flax" should have been "hemp?" Hemp seems to have more of a reputation than flax for answering philosophical questions. 38.117.71.235 (talk) 06:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Tōzan Shusho's reply was "Masagin!" (ma, flax; sa, three; gin, pound).

The golden crow swoops, the silver hare bounds;

The echo comes back, direct and free.

Who judges Tūzan by his word or phrase

Is a blind tortoise, lost in a lonely vale.

If a Westerner not knowing the meaning of the word had heard Tōzan say "Masagin" he would probably have been impressed by the action and the situation in which it took place: by the vigor of Tōzan's speech, the immediacy of his response, the stress placed on the word, and, most important, the image received of Tōzan himself. And all this might have produced a strong effect. But people who understand the meaning of the word -- three pounds of flax -- when they study this case will get caught by the idea the word conveys to them and be too preoccupied by it to see the action as it is. Their understanding of Tōzan will be destroyed, and they will be like a blind tortoise, bewildered and lost. "A lame turtle and a blind tortoise" is a Zen phrase applied to the mentally blind.

Huikai, & Yuanwu. (1977). Two Zen Classics: Mumonkan and Hekiganroku. pp. 71-2, 180-1. OCLC 2818787.—eric 17:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

While not at all being a totally irrelevant question, philosophically--particularly in the context of Zen--it would make no difference, as the verse indicates. Not to presume that's what you're asking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.74.247.249 (talk) 03:53, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

fanfiction writers and copyright

I spent the whole day googling this and I read all the wikipedia articles on it, too, and it still came up short. Does anyone know about copyright and fanfiction? Now I know that the authors of the original work retain copyright on their basic story and fanfiction is a copyright violation. However, the fanfiction writer made a unique organization of words and does copyright for this unique organization of words automatically make the author of the original work to be the copyright owner of the fanfiction work that someone else wrote? Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 07:43, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I am not a lawyer, and Wikipedia doesn't give legal advice, which is just as well because the advice I'm about to give is worthless conjecture. An illegal act cannot claim legal protection; you can't sue a hit man for not killing your spouse like you paid him to. Fanfic is not automatically protected by copyright because it is itself a violation of copyright, and I'm sure the original author would find it easy to take everything such a work might earn, making copyright moot. --Milkbreath (talk) 15:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Ex turpi causa non oritur actio may be of interest. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 15:55, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Well legal advice relates to a specific issue, rather than just a general understanding of a basic idea and I was just asking about a basic idea. Well I did more research based on what people said and it appears that as a derivative work, the fanfiction writer holds copyright over their new content, but the author of the original work can restrict the publishing of such content. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 18:46, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

It's possible the fanfiction author could argue that their work is a parody and thus not a copyright violation and they would hold copyright over their work. Since fanfiction is usually available for free on the internet and in no way harms (and may in fact help) the original work, I doubt there are many court cases on the subject, so it's mostly guess work as to how the relevant laws would be interpreted in this particular case. --Tango (talk) 19:10, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Some authors do not allow fanfiction for their works (Anne Rice and Nora Roberts being two that I can name off the top of my head). Others are okay with it (J.K. Rowling, for instance). I'm not sure about its legality, but it appears to be a right that an author can allow or disallow fanfiction for their work. bibliomaniac15 19:18, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually J.K. Rowling is against all the gay slashfic sex Harry Potter fanfics, which sadly is the majority of the Harry Potter fanfics. chillingeffects has some records of DMCAs going back for six years over this. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 19:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, yes. In the whole though, she "gave her blessing" to non-commercial, non-obscene fanfiction.[9] bibliomaniac15 19:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

It all gets caught up in the rather messy world of derivative work law. Original authors do own copyright on their creations. Hence Rowling's ongoing legal disputes and Lindsey Davis's upset over Simon Scarrow's "tribute plagiarism" (which she defines as "bandit usage of another author's material") when he had her character Falco make a cameo appearance in one of his books. Gwinva (talk) 20:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The case Anderson_v._Stallone is relevant here. GreatManTheory (talk) 21:44, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Like media copyright of music, etc., there are issues between theoretical illegality and "getting away with it". JK Rowling isn't the only author to imply that they won't pursue cease and desists for reasonable fanfics, just as some musicians actively don't pursue file-sharers. Others, Robin Hobb, for example are fiercely defensive of their intellectual property, that is, their characters and fictional world.

Back on topic, though. Because a work of fanfic is technically illegal, regardless of the rights-holder's tacit approval, it seems unlikely that there would be a legal path for defending your fanfic from being distributed by others. However, the world of the internet has its own paths of retribution. Someone who has been caught distributing works they've stolen from others as their own will often be flamed, hacked or otherwise given DoS treatment. These less ethical means have a similar effect. Steewi (talk) 23:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Fanfiction writers have the copyright to their works in the same way that Nina Paley has the copyright to her film Sita Sings the Blues. She can't legally publish it because of licensing issues but no-one else can legally publish it either.[10] Haukur (talk) 23:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Fanfiction tends to intrude on what U.S. copyright law calls the right to derivative works. From this viewpoint, Rowling, who created the characters in the Potter books, owns the rights to other works derived from them. So a fan's book about Harry Potter's life as a merchant banker or an insurance agent depends to a large extent on what people know from Rowling's books -- the banker or insurance agent could be seen as a derivative work. The extent to which (a) Rowling would seek to preserve her rights, or (b) a court would uphold this view is open to question. --- OtherDave (talk) 14:06, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

On the other hand, parodies are generally allowed, and The Wind Done Gone was published... AnonMoos (talk) 14:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but you still have the copyright to your derivative fanfiction - you just can't make much use of it for now. But here's a four point plan: 1) Write Harry Potter fanfiction, 2) Arrange for J.K. Rowling to be struck by lightning, 3) Wait 70 years, 4) Publish your work! Haukur (talk) 14:37, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Because copyright applies to sections of works as well as to entire works (e.g. a new introduction/afterword to an out-of-copyright text is protected), you would probably be able to claim copyright on part of your fanfic if that portion is based around original characters and situations. For instance if an original character spends a while doing something else before going to Hogwarts. However, you would not get rich from the damages. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 16:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Almost everyone including the original poster seems to have assumed that a work of fan fiction is automatically a derivative work. Actually that's far from clear. A story about people named "Harry Potter" and "Draco Malfoy", but having nothing else in common with J K Rowling's work, would not infringe her copyright (names and short phrases are not copyrightable). A story that copied whole descriptive passages or lines of dialogue from her books would be infringing. In between those extremes there's a substantial gray area. You also have to keep trademark law in mind—it's very different from copyright and people often forget about it or conflate it with copyright. The Chilling Effects fanfic FAQ is worth reading, and the Nichols v. Universal decision is also a good read. -- BenRG (talk) 01:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Married into Hungarian nobility

Hi, on the Harriet Howard article it is mentioned that her son married into Hungarian nobility. I am very interested in tracing the descendants of Miss Howard, and I was wondering where it was possible to look to find out whom Martyn Constantine Haryett married? I do know that in 1904, following his first wife's death, he married Germaine Baillon in London. -- role^player 13:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Her name was Marianne-Joséphine-Caroline Csuzy. [11] --Cam (talk) 01:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, that's extremely helpful. -- role^player 01:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Is israel an occupying power?

What are the arguments for and against the idea that Israel is an occupying power? I don't mean to start a debate -- I'd just like the facts and arguments lying on either side. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.27.185.231 (talk) 14:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Occupying power where? Its whole territory? Gaza strip? West Bank, Jerusalem? The arguments are different in regard to each. For the Gaza strip, you could start with Six-day war. Itsmejudith (talk) 14:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

well where, relative to the other places, is the argument strongest for Israel being an occupying power? For this place, what are the arguments and facts for and against it being an occupying power? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.27.185.231 (talk) 14:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Israel's argument is that it's voluntarily undertaking to follow most of the legal restrictions that would apply if it were legally an occupying power, but that technically Israel is not legally an occupying power, since the Gaza strip and the West bank were not under any internationally-recognized sovereignty in May 1967 (Egypt conspicuously refrained from annexing Gaza, and Gazans did not have Egyptian citizenship, while depending on what you read, either no other countries recognized Jordan's annexation of the West bank, or exactly one other country did: Pakistan). AnonMoos (talk) 14:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

For the Gaza Strip, see Gaza_strip#Dispute_over_occupation_status. It's one of the few places which nobody seems to want. Both Egypt and Israel have had the opportunity to annex it, but neither wants to assume responsibility for the miltants therein. There are smaller nations, so it could become a self-governing country, but Hamas is more interested in provoking war than working for peace, as prolonged peace would inevitably lead to a non-terrorist (that is, non-Hamas) controlled government. StuRat (talk) 19:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Events of the past few years in Gaza aside, there has been no real legal dispute that Israel has been an occupying power since 1967, although there has been enough written to obscure this fact. Israel's main argument is not that it is not an occupying power, but that by its reading of the second article of the Fourth Geneva Convention since late 1967, the body of the convention does not apply to its occupation, which Israel has always admitted was an occupation. Israel, under e.g. Military Order 3 for the West Bank even maintained the applicability of the Convention for the first five months of the occupation. The UK definitely did recognize Jordan's annexation, it is very unlikely that Pakistan did, but the overwhelming consensus of experts and authorities is that such recognition issues are quite irrelevant to "occupation", that Israel's argument is very weak. The basic argument "for" is very simple. There was a war, Israel "won" and put territory under its control (and did not annex it). That is the definition of "occupation."John Z (talk) 20:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

That article section is oversimplified, since the Israeli government's position has been that it wasn't an occupying power in a formal legal sense in Gaza even during 1967-2005... AnonMoos (talk) 20:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Per what I wrote above, that is incorrect. In spite of many misleading statements and much propaganda outside of formal legal contexts, the Israeli supreme court, and the government of Israel's statements to it and other bodies in formal legal contexts called it an occupation since 1967.John Z (talk) 20:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

do you mean 'have called it' (ie continue to do so?) anyway a SINGLE reference from the israeli supreme court calling it an occupation would satisfy me. are there any online in English that I could find? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.27.185.231 (talk) 21:33, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

[12] seems to suggest that there is little question both the West Bank and Gaza were occupied terrority. E.g. 'The Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on its Web site, notes that in 1967 the Israel Defense Forces completed the "occupation of West Bank and Gaza Strip."' Our article Israeli-occupied territories also states "In a related case the Israeli Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, stated that Israel has been holding the areas of Judea and Samaria in belligerent occupation, since 1967" sourced to [13] and "However, in recent decades the government of Israel has argued before the Supreme Court of Israel that its authority in the territories is based on the international law of "belligerent occupation", in particular the Hague Conventions. The court has confirmed this interpretation many times, for example in its 2004 and 2005 rulings on the separation fence. [13][14] According to the BBC, "Israel argues that the international conventions relating to occupied land do not apply to the Palestinian territories because they were not under the legitimate sovereignty of any state in the first place." sourced to various places ((Judea and Samaria are parts of the West Bank). All in all it seems JohnZ is mostly correct to me Nil Einne (talk) 10:36, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not an expert in international law, but to be an occupying power, wouldn't you have to be occupying something that belonged to someone else? And wasn't the West Bank kind of a diplomatic no man's land, not recognized by most countries as part of any country? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Many Arabic news sources, whenever reporting from Jerusalem, say "Occupied Jerusalem", not just "Jerusalem". There is a strong feeling in the ME that Palestine is an occupied territory. Wrad (talk) 00:19, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Some refuse to use the word "Jerusalem" at all, probably leaving some people scratching their heads as to what an "al-Quds" may be... AnonMoos (talk) 09:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

political discussion spinoff

There is no conclusive evidence that 'Hamas is more interested in provoking war then peace'. Hamas's primary reason for allowing shelling of Israel to continue was because of Israel's continue blockade of the Gaza Strip and this is supported by a number of sources such as the NYT (check out our article on the war). Note that the shelling did die down a lot (but not stop completely during the ceasefire) however Israel never relaxed the border controls much. Many international commentators and agencies not supportive of Hamas have pointed out that the blockade was not only grossly unfair but empowering Hamas and making smuggling tunnels the only option to bring in any goods (which of course meant they could also be used for smuggling in weapons). How exactly the Gaza Strip was supposed to function as a state when they had no connection whatsoever to the outside world is unclear (as far as I'm aware none of the states smaller then the Gaza Strip, heck none of those bigger function with no connection to the outside world. You could just as well say that Israel appears to be more interested in provoking war then peace because a lot of the political leaders in charge got and remain there mostly because of their perceived strength in defending Israel and if that suddenly is no longer an important factor then they may find themselves out in the cold. Surely an overtly simplistic analysis but so is the claim 'Hamas is more interested in provoking war then peace' which was supportef by no sources. Nil Einne (talk) 09:19, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Pardon me for an unsourced response to the above, but if this is the place for a "political discussion," I'll note the common understanding on the Israeli street that Hamas is an Islamist-nationalist militant organization that actively seeks the destruction of Israel and has been firing rockets and occasionally mortar shells—from its positions deeply embedded in densely populated (civilian) locations— into Israeli civilian territory (e.g. the city of Sderot) for the past eight years, stepped up after Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gush Katif region in mid-2005. Operation Cast Lead is a long-restrained IDF response to those attacks. -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

And the common understanding on Palestinians streets is rather different. None of this proves the unsourced claim from Sturat that 'Hamas is more interested in provoking war then peace' which was the sole topic of my response. I for one thing their goal is a lot more complex then that, as is Israel's and viewing it so simplisticly helps no one. P.S. I did not spin off this into a seperate section, that was done by AnonMoos I guess to avoid it distracting from the topic which was probably a good thing Nil Einne (talk) 10:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Your post was the first in the thread to contain nothing but political disputations unconnected with answering the original question (as opposed to the brief asides in previous comments), so I thought it best to segregate it into its own subsection. AnonMoos (talk) 00:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Nil, do you have any sources (such as statements by Hamas) that show that Hamas does have a long term goal of living side-by-side, in peace, with Israel ? If so, I'd be extremely interested in seeing them. If not, then I'll stand by my opinion of them. Also note that I'm only talking about Hamas here, not Fatah and certainly not the Palestinians in general. (I do, however, have an equally low opinion of Hezbollah.) StuRat (talk) 15:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

You can read Hamas' own statment of its goals here. Pay special attention to the bigoted "Hadith of the Gharqad Tree", and the declaration of eternal jihad against the Lion's Club and Rotary! AnonMoos (talk) 11:43, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Respondents may note that the OP specifically asked for "arguments for and against the idea that Israel is an occupying power", he or she did not ask for anyone's personal opinions of Hamas. Here are some talking points promoting the legitimacy of Israel. You might also consider reading The Case for Israel by Alan Dershowitz (ISBN 0471679526) and it's counterpoint, The Case Against Israel by Michael Neumann (ISBN 1904859461), Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History by Norman Finkelstein (ISBN 0-520-24598-9) and From Time Immemorial by Joan Peters (ISBN 0963624202) Rockpocket 18:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

How many US presidents have been alive at the same time?

One future, one current and three former US presidents are meeting for lunch at the moment. But what's the largest gathering of former presidents that could ever have been arranged? What about British Prime Ministers? --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 15:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I've got the data for English Prime Ministers in a table but need to do some work to get it move definitive. In 2005 there will have been 5 (James Callaghan, Edward Heath, Margaret Thatcher, John Major and Tony Blair - at that point Gordon Brown hadn't been Prime Minister). There may be a bigger version throughout history - will update once had chance to compare. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 16:04, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

List of United States Presidents by date of death may help. After Bill Clinton's departure from office in 2001, there were 5 alive Ford, Carter, Reagan, George HW Bush, and Clinton. In 1993 there were Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, and GHWB. In 1989 Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan. Interestingly, after Jan 22, 1973 when LBJ died, there were NO former presidents alive until Nixon's resignation. I suspect the situation in 1993/2001 is the record breaker. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 16:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

From Oldest living United States president: "The most number of living presidents is six. There were three periods where there this has happened." --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:17, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Damn it, I just worked that out. The other occasion for a meeting of 5 former presidents was after March 4, 1861 when incumbent Abraham Lincoln could have entertained his 5 predecessors Martin Van Buren (1837-41; d.1862), John Tyler (1845-45; d.1862), Millard Filmore (1850-53; d.1874), Franklin Pierce (1853-57; d.1869), and James Buchanan (1857-61; d.1868) --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 16:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

As for British Prime ministers, there's been 5 former prime ministers quite often since 1900:

• 23 May 1923: New: Stanley Baldwin (d. 1947), Former: Andrew Bonar Law (d. Oct 1923), David Lloyd George (d. Mar 1945), Herbert Asquith (d.1928), Arthur Balfour (d.1930), The Earl of Rosebery (d. 1929)
• 22 January 1924: New: Ramsay MacDonald (d. Nov 1937), Former: Baldwin (d. 1947), Lloyd George (d. Mar 1945), Asquith (d.1928), Balfour (d.1930), Rosebery (d. 1929)
• 4 November 1924: New: Baldwin (d. 1947), Former: MacDonald (d. Nov 1937), Lloyd George (d. Mar 1945), Asquith (d.1928), Balfour (d.1930), Rosebery (d. 1929)
• 16 October 1964: New: Harold Wilson (d. 1995), Former: Douglas-Home (d. 1995), Macmillan (d. 1986), Eden (d. 1977), Churchill (d. 1965), Attlee (d. 1967)
• 5 April 1976: New: James Callaghan (d. 2005), Former: Wilson (d. 1995), Heath (d. 2005), Home (d. 1995), Macmillan (d. 1986), Eden (d. 1977)
• 4 May 1979: New: Margaret Thatcher, Former: Callaghan (d. 2005), Wilson (d. 1995), Heath (d. 2005), Home (d. 1995), Macmillan (d. 1986)
• 28 November 1990: New: John Major, Former: Thatcher, Callaghan (d. 2005), Wilson (d. 1995), Heath (d. 2005), Home (d. 1995)

Terms tended to be longer before 1900, so I'd be surprised if it occurred before then, but I don't know for sure. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 17:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 17:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

This is only marginally related to the question, but I thought you'd all like to know that, since the swearing-in of the incumbent (and first female) last September, Australia currently has 6 living former governors-general, more than at any time in the past. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorting of Indonesian names

How are Indonesian names normally sorted in Indonesia? Are Indonesian phonebooks sorted by first given name? I tried asking this over on the Indonesian Wikipedia a year ago but I didn't get a definite answer.[14] Does anyone here know? Haukur (talk) 23:33, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

A lot of Indonesians have only one name, and even in the case of many who have more than one word in their name, none of the words may very closely correspond to western concepts of a hereditary surname, so western phonebook ordering rules might not be too useful... Do you know whether "white pages" type phonebooks are even very prominent in Indonesian cultures? AnonMoos (talk) 09:45, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a hereditary surname either and I'm used to people being sorted by first given name. No idea how common phonebooks are in Indonesia but I'd be interested in how any such list of names is sorted. What they do on the Indonesian Wikipedia seems to be to sort by the last name, whether that is a given name or a patronymic or whatever.[15] I don't understand the logic behind that so I'm wondering whether it's a widespread Indonesian way of sorting names or whether it's some sort of borrowing of typical enwiki sorting. Haukur (talk) 13:00, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

While I can't answer the question hopefully this will help. In Malaysia at least, IIRC (it's been a while since I looked at one) in phone books are mostly sorted as they appear/are written. For a chinese name, E.g. Lim Kit Siang will be sorted by Lim (surname/family name). [This is the only case I'm sure of.) For a Malay name, e.g. Mahathir bin Mohamad as Mahathir (given name). The same for Abdullah bin Haji Ahmad Badawi even though Badawi is actually a surname not simply a patronym. For Indians I believe it's the same even for those with surnames. E.g. Karpal Singh will be sorted as Karpal not Singh. This is the same as the way they are referred to in a formal context e.g. see [16] where he is referred to as Karpal not Singh. For Western European names (or names with a Western European influence e.g. Kristang people or Tony Fernandes I'm not sure. He would usually be referred to as Fernandes but I'm not sure if that's how it's sorted in a phone book. Of course Indonesian names are often quite different from Malaysian names but my gut feeling is the same general idea will apply. If you refer to the person as Megawati then you will likely sort as Megawati. Since this is usually the first part of the name, then it's a rather simple system too. Again the tricky question may be what about those cases where it's not? Nil Einne (talk) 11:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, and I should mention that Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Malaysia-related articles)#Names_and_sorting recommends sorting by first given name. Haukur (talk) 13:06, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

January 8

US Cabinet confirmation process

I saw this on MSNBC.com:

"If approved by the panel, Clinton could be confirmed by the full Senate before Obama takes office on Jan. 20. "

But don't cabinet secretaries need to be nominated by the President before they can be confirmed by the Senate? And Obama can't do that if he's not yet president. Or will the incumbent nominate the President-elect's choices as a courtesy? Sam 01:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SamUK (talk • contribs)

It looks like a case of poor reporting. Only a president can nominate a cabinet official, so unless Dubious is going to nominate Sen. Clinton, there is no way she could become Secretary of State before Sen. Obama becomes President. DOR (HK) (talk) 05:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Who occupies this position when Obama becomes president? Does the previous cabinet member stay on until there's a replacement? Or does the position unfilled? 216.239.234.196 (talk) 18:40, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

It is my perception that all the ground work for Congressional hearings is occurring now. I've read about Tom Daschle and Hillary Clinton's hearings going ahead. Is this accurate? I don't see a committee report can be issued, however, without a formal nomination. It is also important to remember that there is a powerful bureaucracy sitting in place. There is some minor trouble surrounding transition. Lately, the party that is leaving trashes the offices. 75Janice (talk) 01:48, 9 January 2009 (UTC)75Janice

There's usually one of two things which happen, either the person from the previous administration stays on until the replacement is confirmed, or there may be a temporary replacement until the permanent one is confirmed. The current United States Deputy Secretary of State, or someone lower on the totem pole, could become Acting Secretary of State until Hillary arrives. If Obama doesn't like anyone who is currently working at the Secretary of State's office, he can consider Hillary to be his Acting Secretary of State, at least as far as offering him advice and representing the US abroad. Her salary and formal powers (such as her position in the United States presidential line of succession) would have to wait until she's confirmed, however. StuRat (talk) 21:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Saraiki Sikhs

Is this true that in Pakistan, some Sikhs speak Saraiki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.128.143 (talk) 02:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

It is likely true that "some" of any group speak just about any language. "Some" Japanese speak Korean; "some" Mexicans speak German, . . . DOR (HK) (talk) 05:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

In addition to DOR's correct answer, most Indian Sikhs live in Punjab state, which is in the north-west, which is where most of India's 70,000+ Saraiki speakers live, so there's more overlap than the German-speaking Mexicans have. If you're asking whether there is a large population of Saraiki-speaking Sikhs, I don't know. --Sean 12:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

According to our article Saraiki people, some Saraiki, who typically speak Saraiki, are in fact Sikhs. According to our article on Sikhs, some 20,000 Sikhs live in Pakistan. No doubt some of these speak Saraiki. Marco polo (talk) 19:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

literary insight

I've seen the term "literary insight" in several places (examples: J. Michael Eakin, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Samuel Johnson). What is a good definition of "literary insight"? --68.109.175.242 (talk) 02:33, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I think that "insight" was the wrong word in the first instance you link to, where I'd like to see "flair". "Literary insight" would be, I guess, an ability to perceive hidden meanings and subtleties and references and mechanics in writing. --Milkbreath (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Is Pakistan doing enough to combat terrorism?

Sometimes I hear people (especially from India, but also from the US) say that Pakistan is not doing enough to fight terrorists in Pakistan. What exactly is Pakistan doing wrong? They seem to be doing as much as they can. ExitRight (talk) 13:15, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

We have a decent starting point (poor style, but well-referenced) at War on Terrorism in Pakistan. In short, there have been numerous allegations in the past few years that Pakistan is actively aiding terrorist activities. "Doing enough", though, is and will remain a value judgment, and the reference desk can offer no firm answer. — Lomn 13:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

1) The ISI played a strong role in the rise of the Taliban, and has never been thoroughly purged of those with strong connections to radical extremist groups. It's widely suspected that influential figures within the ISI continue to support the Taliban in its war to regain power in Afghanistan, and maintain close relations with groups involved in terrorist attacks in Indian Kashmir and elsewhere. Not very long ago, Taliban leaders were reported to be moving openly and freely around the city of Quetta.

2) Pakistan has never properly controlled or administered the North-West Frontier etc., or provided government services there -- allowing it to remain a lawless tribal zone which has become a center of al-Qa`eda and Taliban support.

3) The Pakistani government has taken no meaningful measures to significantly reform extremist madrassas (including some from which many recruits for the Taliban have come).

In general, since about the mid-70's, the Pakistani political/military elites have followed an overall strategy of tacitly encouraging Islamic religious extremists in order to put pressure on India with respect to Kashmir and other issues. This strategy has failed to win Pakistan a single inch of land in Kashmir, but it has greatly contributed to prolonging misery in Afghanistan, made the lives of many women and non-Muslims in Pakistan wretched and miserable (see Zia ul-Haq's Islamization, Hudood Ordinance, Blasphemy law in Pakistan, Human rights in Pakistan etc.), led Pakistan to the brink of war with India several times, and effectively distracted attention away from other critical issues and vitally-needed reforms in Pakistan (which is considered by some commentators not very far from being a failed state...). AnonMoos (talk) 14:03, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

While I don't disagree with anything that AnonMoos has said, a problem from the Pakistani perspective is that the Pakistani state does not really enjoy legitimacy in its own right in the North-West Frontier, much of Balochistan, or the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, which despite their name are largely outside the control of the Pakistani federal government. These are primarily the parts of Pakistan where the Taliban and other Islamist insurgent groups are based. (Whether these groups should be called "terrorists", a term that is difficult to define objectively, is a matter of perspective.) Attacks on Islamist insurgents in these regions, who enjoy the backing of a substantial part of the populace, further erodes Pakistani legitimacy in these regions and tends to reduce Pakistan's chances of ever freeing these regions of Islamist insurgent domination. It is a Catch-22 situation, not helped by the steady weakening of the Pakistani state even in its heartlands of Punjab and Sindh. (This weakness is due partly to misrule, as AnonMoos suggests, but also to extreme poverty, birth rates that are too high, a lack of resources, and a related lack of economic development, which are themselves partly but not entirely the result of the dysfunctional political system.) So I think that, notwithstanding all of the grave errors of Pakistan's political and military elites in the past, they face a difficult task in making headway against the Taliban and their like in the present. Perhaps their only hope would be to recognize the country's desperate need for good government and economic development, to concentrate the country's limited resources on education and economic development, and then gradually be in a position to offer the people of the North-West Frontier, Balochistan, and Tribal Areas a prospect of peace and prosperity in return for turning away from the Taliban and their like. However, that would require a shifting of resources away from military operations along the country's western frontier, which would bring Pakistan criticism and perhaps penalties from Western countries wanting Pakistan to stop terrorism. Yet another Catch-22 for Pakistan. Marco polo (talk) 21:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

If Pakistani elites had spent a lot less resources trying to rival and strategically threaten India (something which Pakistan's general geopolitical situation does not allow it to easily do) and a lot more resources on real internal development and reform of Pakistan's rotten "feudal" system, then Pakistan would certainly be a lot better off than it actually is now. By the way, the article War on Terrorism in Pakistan doesn't have anything remotely resembling a proper Wikipedia article introductory paragraph (and never has had one, as far as I can tell...). AnonMoos (talk) 23:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

It's quite possible that Pakistan may "do all they can", but that this still may not be enough to stop Pakistan from becoming a terrorist-controlled state (with nuclear weapons). Here are some additional things Pakistan could try:

4) Don't ever sign peace treaties with al Queada or the Taliban and give them money, as they have done in the past. This gives those groups legitimacy, resources, and time to build up their armies.

5) Train their military in anti-insurgency tactics. They currently seem to be trained for a war with India, which is foolishness, as that's a far smaller threat than the insurgents are.

6) If they can't manage to control the frontier areas, they should allow others to do so. If they have no presence there, it shouldn't even be considered part of Pakistan. Allow those states that can't be controlled to secede. StuRat (talk) 21:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Stu I agree with most of your given suggestions but the last one (6) is completly foolish. No goverment and state of this planet is going to surrender any piece of land whatsoever without a extremely powerful reason. All countries/national goverments are very interrested in keeping the unity of their entire territory and in surpressing movements of secession, peacefully if possible, and by force if neccessary.

Even if the central goverment is unable to control effectivly a "renegade/secceding province" for whatever reason (usually political, economic, and military weakness) it will not easily recognize a de facto independence. It will simply wait, gather its strength, and hope for the right opportunity. With a bit of luck the seccesionists will kill each other and/or the national military will eventually crush them. Exactly this seems to be happening recently in Sri Lanka. Better to fight through years and entire decades if neccessary in order to mantain national unity.

At the first glance it might seem a bit ilogical ("What would be the big diff of accepting a de facto independence?" and "Better peace than war") but it is completly logical. If you allow one province to seccede, other provinces - encouraged by success of the first - will also try to seccede. Exactly that's why the Chinese goverment is not going to accept an official independence of Taiwan any time soon.

It's not because they hate the Taiwanese, its democracy, or something like that (despite what the American media likes to proclaim). It's because if China lets Taiwan, it's going to have an exploding powder-keg with Tibet, the western province with the muslim majority, Manchuria (Manchus are not Han Chinese), the special northern Mongol area, and God knows what else in their hands.

And what will happen if a province seccedes? Foolish and arrogant local politicians/fools (mostly of the new nation, but also from neighboring countries) are going to demand a "redrawing of the borders" with the age-old argument that in the past "our" nation was bigger. And this usually leads to war.

Study history, this happenend nearly all the time. The few occasions in which this didn't happen (e.g.: the Velvet divorce of Chekoslovakia) are simply the exceptions that prove the rule.

If Pakistan gives up the the northern provinces, others will also demand their own independence. In the bitter end a lot of ppl will have to die and for what? So that in the end some politician proclaims that they are all so free? They still are going to pay taxes. It simply isn't worth it, UNLESS the central goverment starts a ethnic genocide against a ethnic/cultural/religious minority (like Serbia was doing in Kosovo). In such cases all bets are off. Flamarande (talk) 01:05, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

At this point, the negatives from trying to retain the tribal areas seem to far outweigh any benefits to Pakistan. It was likely groups operating out of the tribal territories which both assassinated Benazir Bhutto and attacked India, actions which tend to destablize the Pakistan government. I also doubt if being granted independence from Pakistan would be much of a victory for the Taliban or al Queda, as the US and others would then be free to hunt them down there. It might be a victory for the tribal leaders, however, as they could re-establish control after those groups were eliminated. StuRat (talk) 08:54, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

the amateur detective who didn't move much.

Hi everybody. I have the vague memory of an amateur detective stories where the heroe never moves from his home and solves the cases remotely. Do such stories ever existed ? I'd be glad to get help on that. Gino. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.72.115.193 (talk) 23:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Nero Wolfe stories by Rex Stout. Good times. —Kevin Myers 23:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Mycroft Holmes is kind of like that (though he's not the protagonist...). -- AnonMoos (talk) 23:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

And of course some detecive fiction fans have enjoyed speculating that Wolfe is the son or nephew of Mycroft Holmes. —Kevin Myers 23:53, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank You ! Gino. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.72.115.193 (talk) 00:21, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Though it sounds like it's Nero Wolfe you're looking for, there is of course also L.B. Jeffries. Grutness...wha? 00:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

They don't move much less than the Dead Man in Glen Cook's series Garrett P.I.. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 00:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Mycroft Holmes is the protagonist in a series of books by "Quinn Fawcett". —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnyPerson (talk • contribs) 03:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I once read a funny article where someone argued that Mycroft Holmes was an early digital computer. The Doyle stories actually referred to Mycroft's "digits" and to the glowing of his "eyes" (displays?). Digital computers I have interacted with tended not to move around much. Edison (talk) 05:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Interesting theory - and, of course, there's a well-known fictional computer named after him in Robert Heinlein's The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. Grutness...wha? 07:30, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

There's also the Hercule Poirot story The Disappearance of Mr Davenheim (1923), in which Poirot wins a bet with Japp that he can solve the case within a week without leaving his apartment. Xn4 (talk) 12:19, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

i've heard that americans are lazy but this question takes the cake!! 86.217.98.213 (talk) 20:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC) (sorry!)

From my recollection, Poirot was Belgian, Mycroft Homes was English, and Nero Wolfe was Basque. ៛ Bielle (talk) 22:06, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I resent the implication that Americans are lazy, and would disprove this statement with numerous facts and studies, but I'm feeling in need of a nap just now. StuRat (talk) 01:04, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Wolfe was from Montenegro, actually, in all but one of the accounts, as the Nero Wolfe article explains. Well, he was from Montenegro as much as any fictional character is from anywhere... --- OtherDave (talk) 03:04, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

OtherDave is quite correct, and I apologise for my faulty memory. There is something to be said for checking the facts before saving the text. :-) ៛ Bielle (talk) 03:33, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

It should also be noted that there was NO attempt made to create any sort of logical chronology or backstory between the MANY Nero Wolfe stories. The author intentionally did not try to create one, and intended each to be a stand-alone story. The characters do have consistant personalities and there are some vague commonalities, but there is no consistant "Nero Wolfe" universe that can be reasonably created... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:04, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I've noticed the same lack of consistent back story in a very popular ongoing series of detective/adventure novels which are reportedly ghostwritten. Apparently the newest writer did not bother to read all the earlier novels. Edison (talk) 05:30, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

This subgenre is known as "armchair detection", and the oldest example of it is Edgar Allan Poe's tale of The Mystery of Marie Roget.Rhinoracer (talk) 13:36, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

January 9

Leap Years

I understand that the Hebrew Religious Calendar back in the turn of the century B.C. to A.D. had a Leap Year every six years where a month was added (Adar Sheni). Adar is the twelth month (February - March in our Julian Calendar0; Sheni means second. I would like to know when was the closest Leap Year month added to A.D 1. Thank you for your assistance. Al —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.235.92.249 (talk) 00:42, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Adar bet is not added once in 6 years, but rather more often, see Hebrew_calendar#Leap_months. The year 2008/2009 CE is 5769, which means the year 0/1 CE was 3761. Since 3761 = 19*197 + 18, that was 18-th year of the 19-year cycle. Therefore both the year before (3760) and the year after (3762) had Adar bet. That is, assuming the rule for adding Adar bet was the same before Hillel (I'm not sure about that). --Dr Dima (talk) 01:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually if you read our article Hebrew calendar, you will find that the current method of following a standard cycle of leap years on the 3rd, 6th, 8th, 11th, 14th, 17th, and 19th years of a 19-year cycle was not adopted until probably the 4th century CE (AD). In the first century BCE, Jewish religious leaders inserted leap months so as to keep the lunar calendar on a seasonal cycle by judging whether barley was ripe at the end of Adar. If it was not, a leap month was added, and that year became a leap year. In the first century, when it was done by observation, the insertion of leap months would have been irregular and based partly on the weather that year. For example, if Judea had had a cold, wet spring that delayed planting in the year after a leap year, the barley might have ripened so late that a leap month could have been inserted two years in a row. If Judea then had a series of gradually warmer and sunnier springs that allowed for earlier plantings for several years in a row, a leap year might conceivably be delayed for several years. In practice, leap years would have tended to be years with colder, wetter springs. Given this observational basis and irregularity, there is no way to calculate when leap years were declared in pre-Talmudic times. We may not even have a complete historical record of those ancient leap years, so we may not know which leap year was closest to 1 CE (AD 1). Marco polo (talk) 01:50, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

uni degree

what is an uni degree and how do i get one i want to travel to japan and teach english but i need an uni degree first.66.55.209.235 (talk) 01:59, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

A university degree is a qualification issued by a university. The standard way to get one is to attend a university for 3-5 years (depending on the nature of the degree and what country you are in). If you want a career as a teacher, then you will probably need a degree, but teaching English as a way to fund some travelling can often be done with a lesser qualification - see TEFL#Qualifications_for_TEFL_teachers for some more detail. --Tango (talk) 02:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Although all of my friends who have gone to China or Korea (not Japan) to teach English have had university degrees (usually in unrelated disciplines...), many have reported that the demand for English teachers is so great that the university degree rule was very lax. Many of the firms they worked for employed people who lied about having a degree, didn't provide any evidence of a degree or simply said they didn't have one. This is not a suggestion. NByz (talk) 20:02, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Canadian Contract Law

Hello. I am asking this question out of curiosity. I AM NOT ASKING THIS QUESTION FOR LEGAL ADVICE. Are contracts made by two minors in Canada legally binding? If so, can either party legally rescind from the contract if the contract involves non-necessaries and if there were no financial benefits?

This what I mean by "there were no financial benefits".

A minor bought vintage comics worth $4233.75 altogether, using money from his parent's credit card through cash advances. The minor wanted to refund the comics after thinking more about his purchase. The store owner refused but offered advice on selling the comics. The minor sold some of the comics. He went to court to void the contract with the store owner, arguing that the contract was voidable because it involved non-necessaries. The court dismissed the minor's action because some of the comics increased in value and the minor would have received a financial benefit.

Thanks very much. --Mayfare (talk) 02:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

You may well be asking the question "out of curiosity" but a request about the binding nature of a contract, about the capacity of minors to enter into binding contracts, and about the significance, if any, of a financial component, is a request for an opinion on matters of law, which is otherwise known as "legal advice". Any other opinion, not based on legal knowledge, would be useless in respect of any answer to your question. ៛ Bielle (talk) 04:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I would be very surprised if (a) contracts signed by minors were legal; and (b) stealing and using a credit card comprised a contractual obligation. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

The articles on Contract, Age of Majority, and Capacity (law) have some information. The law varies between Canadian provinces, but generally minors can void most contracts with varying exceptions (they may not be able to void contracts for for sale of necessaries; for student loans; etc). A minor is either below 18 or 19 depending on the province. "Necessaries" is a vague term; a rough US definition is "food, lodging, clothing, medicine, medical attention, and education ... to the extent such items are suited to the minor's social position and situation in life." [17] --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 17:26, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

To try again: the question with the inset paragraph appears to be a case that has already been before the courts. (I am still trying to work out who the second minor is, unless he/she is the purveyor of the comic books.) The OP is asking for the opinion of the Ref Desk respondents on matters of law as have already been decided. If we are still not convinced that this is a request for legal advice, then perhaps we could consider that the question reads most like homework for a class on contract law, and avoid providing commentary. Links may be useful; they may also be misleading. ៛ Bielle (talk) 17:50, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Are chain letters containing threats illegal in the UK?

This is not a request for legal advice (honestly!) - but I'm wondering if it is, in fact against the law in the UK to forward chain letters/emails/text messages which threaten bodily harm, death or various other 'bad things' to those who 'break the chain' and don't forward the message on to <x number of> people? I know that the pyramid scheme-type chain letters are illegal - but what about the ones of the potentially psychologically-damaging variety?

I know otherwise-rational men in their 30s who'll get freaked out and forward this junk on to everyone they know, 'just in case'. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 03:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Chain letter or no, I'm fairly certain it's illegal to threaten people with violence in the UK, especially in an attempt to force them to do something they would otherwise not do. Algebraist 03:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

From the ones I've seen, it's never a case of "I, the guy who just sent you this whom you probably know well, am going to murder you if you don't send this on to everyone in your address book" - rather it's content like "<Whoever> from <Wherever> didn't forward this piece of crap on to everyone in his address book within 72 hours and died in an unexplained car crash/was murdered by an unknown assailant in broad daylight the very next day". It's not quite a direct threat, but it's certainly rather nasty... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 03:43, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

The ones I've seen vary. Some are rubbish,, right from the first word. But some others have excellent content, which I read with great pleasure, only to be turned off by "If you send this to 10 people within 72 hours, <something good> will happen to you. If you don't, <something bad> will happen to you". And I think, why did they ruin such a positive message? I refuse on principle to ever send them on. I'm quite prepared to take my chances. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Under the common law of England, a threat of bodily harm or death is usually a common assault. Xn4 (talk) 12:04, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I would imagine this would come under the auspices of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (full text). Nanonic (talk) 12:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Only if a threatening chain letter is sent to you by the same person more than once, which seems unlikely. Xn4 (talk) 12:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 contains an "Offence of causing intentional harassment, alarm or distress" which might apply[18]. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Russian painters

Might someone be so kind as to name the more significant Russian painters? Any era is of interest. Neither Russian painters nor Russian art sheds any light on this question. Thank you. –Outriggr § 03:40, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

There is the Category:Russian painters as well as your list. Off the top of my head – among these, Malevich founder of the Suprematist movement, dynamic cubist Goncharova, and constructivist, Rodchenko stand out. There's also a List of 19th century Russian painters. Oops I forgot Sonia Delaunay art deco orphist, Kandinsky and Marc Chagall. Léon Bakst painted Nijinksy. Once you get into these articles, just click on their contemporaries to get going. There's a beautiful early painter who was a serf but I forget his name. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:25, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay, now we've got two, Vasily Tropinin and Vasily Sadovnikov, but Tropinin's work is the eye-candy for people and Maxim Vorobiev also 1700s is for landscapes. :) Julia Rossi (talk) 09:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I can agree with calling Tropinin's work "eye-candy" (self-portrait pictured) although, curiously enough, in his youth he worked as a confectioner. Xn4 (talk) 12:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Such a list must always be somewhat subjective, but don't forget Andrei Rublev. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Ilya Repin is probably the most-famous Russian painter of the XIXth Century. --Xuxl (talk) 15:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

The most valuable Russian paintings (based on auction prices) are by Natalia Goncharova (her Picking Apples is top), Konstantin Somov, Aleksandr Yakovlev, and Ivan Aivazovsky.[19] The modernist Goncharova is a brilliant artist, and her husband Mikhail Larionov is also very good. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 17:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Question about the Blago mess

Hello all,

I'm been keeping up with the scandal over Illinois Governor Blagojevich. A State House panel has recommended he be impeached. Since Governors have pardon powers, could the Governor pardon himself and end all of this? 75.180.235.209 (talk) 07:50, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

No. The governor's pardon power is defined by Article V, Section 12, of the Illinois state constitution, which specifically says that he can grant pardons after conviction. Supposing that he did commit a crime, he could be impeached and convicted first (after which he's no longer governor), then tried in criminal court and convicted there, and he would not be able to do anything.

Note: we are not allowed to give legal advice here. If you are Governor Blagojevich, please disregard this response. --Anonymous, 09:39 UTC, January 9, 2009.

Thanks for your help, Anon! The post above was by me; I just forgot to login; and I'm not the Governor by any means! - Thanks, Hoshie 10:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

And keep in mind if officials could pardon themselves out of an impeachment then there wouldn't really be an impeachment power, would there? --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:03, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

While I'm not familiar with Illinois law, the pardon power generally does not apply to impeachment. The impeachment process removes a holder from office; it does not convict of a crime. John M Baker (talk) 00:57, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Nonfarm

Why do job reports, specifically in the US, measure job loss as the reduction in nonfarm employment? Why don't they count the agriculture industry in the employment reports? Borisblue (talk) 21:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Nonfarm payrolls says "[t]he farming industry is not included because of its seasonal hiring which would distort the number around harvest times". Haukur (talk) 22:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

January 10

we are ispanic family.

our question is hoe we can become part of your nation because we'r living in this country for some many years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.224.18.117 (talk) 00:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Are you saying you're a Hispanic family which wants to become US citizens ? Or are you in another country ? What is you're current status ? Do you have green cards, or are you in the country illegally ? StuRat (talk) 00:51, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Not meaning to get all Hermione Granger about it, but let's make sure this doesn't cross into legal advice territory. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 02:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

This could be a question about gaining a sense of participation, of belonging, that is not legal, but emotional or psychological. However, as we are not even certain of the country involved, it is difficult to know which way to orient an answer. ៛ Bielle (talk) 03:01, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I guess that's better than getting all Hermione Baddeley about it. If they are interested in citizenship, there's plenty of ways to help with that without giving legal advice. We could refer them to an INS site which lists the requirements to obtain citizenship, for example. StuRat (talk) 03:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

We aren't sure exactly what you're asking or which nation you want to become a part of. Wikipedia is international. This is just an opinion, but if you have been living in a country for many years, then I think that you are part of it, even if you don't have legal status. If it is legal status that you want, we are sorry that Wikipedia cannot offer legal advice, but you may be able to find a lawyer or other expert advice at an organization dedicated to helping immigrants. We might be able to find such an organization in your country if we knew which country that is. Marco polo (talk) 04:00, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Situation in Myanmar

Does anyone know of any good ideas that can help improve the conflict in Myanmar, aside from economic sanctions? Any ideas would be much appreciated.

-Julie

Julie, this is a reference desk.--Wetman (talk) 02:33, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I am aware of that. Sorry I do not understand, but what you are implying?

What I think he's getting at is we're quite good at answering questions that have a definitive answer - e.g. "What percentage of the average human body is water?" and less good at answering questions that have more subjective answers - e.g. "What is the meaning of life?". To go back to your original question - there are various methods of pressure that could be applied aside from economic sanctions - diplomatic pressure, UN resolutions, offering economic aid in exchange for democratic reforms or even military action. However the bottom line is that only the people of Myanmar have the right and ability to decide the future of their country - there are over 50 million people there - and 500,000 soldiers. No military dictatorship could continue in power should the entire country turn against them. Exxolon (talk) 03:27, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Inaugural Youth Concert

I know this is a pretty atypical question for the RD, but I've tried googling all different variants on the question and am surprisingly not getting anything. Does anybody know where to get tickets to the youth concert on January 19 in Washington DC? It is officially connected to the Inauguration. Admission is free but tickets are required… where can we get them? Thanks, Fbv65edel — t — c // 05:37, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

According to the Verizon Center site [20], there has yet been no announcement about tickets, though the schedule does show the event at the Center. If you click on the link in this paragraph, there is a further link to a site where you can leave your email address in order to receive information as it becomes available. ៛ Bielle (talk) 05:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

looking up entry/exit requirements for travel

is there a place where one can find entry/exit requirements to various countries for chinese nationals who are also u.s. permanent residents (green card holders)? there are various countries for which the consular sites say that us nationals do not require a visa while chinese nationals do. However, these sites do not say anything about chinese nationals with green cards. --Blahmebe (talk) 05:59, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

The most authoritative reference is the consular sites, which you've already looked at, or actually contacting consulates/embassies. The green card is not a travel document or passport, and (as you'll see from consular sites) most countries base their visa requirements on nationality not residency, so it is likely that most of them will not consider possession of a green card as grounds to exempt you from visa requirements. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 11:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

In how far is Palestine a souvereign country?

How much is Palestine a sovereign country? I don't mean international recognition, but domestically. There is a government, albeit split now, but how completely does it govern? For example, afaik it doesn't have a regular army (which I suppose is why Hamas is called a terrorist organisation). Israel invaded the Gaza Strip, so it had no military presence there. But on the West Bank, Israel puts up road blocks and walls, so does it effectively police that area? Or does the PLO also have a police? On this map, do the Palestinians have complete control over the green areas? For another aspect, does Palestine have its own money and can it freely trade with other countries without interference from Israel? For example, I understand that Palestinians (at least in the Gaza strip) need permission from Israel to leave their country (or whatever it should be called). Is this true? DirkvdM (talk) 09:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

From my understanding, the West Bank is divided into Israeli-controlled (Area C) and Palestinian-controlled (Area A and B) areas. Generally speaking, Fatah controls the Palestinian population centers of the West Bank. The Jewish settlements and most of the rural area are under the jurisdiction of the Israeli army. Because the Jewish and Arab areas of the West Bank are so mixed up together, one often has to traverse Area C to get from one Palestinian town to another. Hence the checkpoints. Again my understanding is that Fatah has complete control over the Palestinian population centers in the West Bank, including the security forces. The Israeli shekel and Jordanian dinar are used as currency. Israel controls the Jordan River, so there is no way out of the West Bank without traversing an area of Israeli control. The Gaza-Egypt border is generally closed at Egyptian insistence. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:59, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, of course one has to traverse Israel (occupied) territory overland to leave the West Bank. But is that just a practical obstacle? For example, what about air travel (assuming there are Palestinians who could afford that)? And what about the Gaza strip? It borders on the sea, so can't Palestinians travel and trade over the Mediterranean? Gaza has a small port, but on Google Maps I see only small boats. Oh, and can't journalists get in through there? DirkvdM (talk) 09:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

The only exits from the West Bank are over the Allenby Bridge or through Israel. There's no commercial airport on the West Bank itself. The Gaza airport has been shut down, and Gaza basically blockaded from the sea (except for intermittently-tolerated brief local fishing trips) since late 2000... AnonMoos (talk) 11:54, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I now read in a newspaper a remark that Israel should stop the blockade of the Gaza Strip. That was originally the reason for my question. I read hints about this, but no clear explanation. Does Israel stop all international trade by the Palestinians? So not just guns? DirkvdM (talk) 09:56, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Large-scale commercial trade into and out of Gaza is usually only allowed by Israel at times when there is almost complete cessation of all violence -- something which has been increasingly rare since late 2000. Israel normally allows humanitarian supplies and basic necessary commodities to flow into Gaza except when there are major onging hostilities, but this shoveling in of international aid over the wall does very little by itself to sustain an active economy within Gaza. AnonMoos (talk) 11:54, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

What territories did Israel conquer in 1967?

I've read that Hamas has effectively (if not officially) abandoned its goal of destroying Israel when a few months ago it said that Israel should withdraw from the territories it occupied in 1967 (the Six day war). But the article doesn't make clear what those territories are. Is there a map of that? Or of the situation before that, so I can compare it with the present situation? Oddly, I find lots of maps of battle plans and such, but none of the resulting actual situations. DirkvdM (talk) 09:47, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

In general, the international community recognizes Isreal proper as the territory from before the 6-day war; During the 6 day war, Isreal occupied these territories: the Golan Heights (occupied from Syria), the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, (occupied from Jordan) and the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip, occupied from Egypt. While Israel would later return the Sinai to Egypt, they still techinically "occupy" the remaining territories(Golan, Gaza, West Bank, East Jerusalem). I'm surprised that you had trouble finding this in our article on the Six Day War, that article clearly explains these 3 territories, and the links to each territory contain some nice maps... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 11:59, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I read the text, but what precisely constituted, for example, 'the West Bank' before the war? Oh, hold on, the second map in that article answers that question. The problem is there is such a humungous amout of articles on the area. That map should really (also) be in the Six Day War article. Oh, I see it is also in the 1949 Armistice Agreements article. Anyway, question answered; what is now regarded as the Palestinian areas is the same as what it was before 1967. I understand the borders of the UN Partition Plan were never effectuated. DirkvdM (talk) 13:00, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

In general, the Palestinian Territories are considered to be the West Bank and Gaza Strip (The Golan Heights has always been considered a Syrian territory, and lies outside of the general definition of Palestine). Most Israeli people, and indeed many factions within the Israeli government, consider the two to be part of any Two-state solution for a truly independent Palestine. Some of the stumbling blocks for that solution are:

• The disposition of East Jerusalem which Israel considers an integral part of Jerusalem, but which most Palestinians consider an integral part of their territory.
• The question of security, which is probably the biggest stumbling block for true Palestinian sovereignty. Isreal's main objection to granting full sovereignty to Palestine is the inability (or lack of desire) of the Palestinian Authority to prevent attacks into Isreal from Palestinian territory.
• Political fragmentation within the Palestinian Territories; currently Hamas is in charge in Gaza, and Fatah is in charge of the West Bank; most major parties to the conflict do not favor a "three-state" solution, and yet that seems to be where the current trend is heading.
• The status of Israeli settlements, especially within the West Bank. Some of these were settled under the authority of the Israeli government, and others "illegal", but the question of what to do with Israeli nationals within the Palestinian territories greatly complicates any potential Palestinian sovereignty question.

I agree that there is a HUGE amount of Wikipedia dedicated to this conflict, but it is a massively complicated problem. It is likely at least as messed up as the Schleswig-Holstein Question of the 1800's, a problem so complicated that Lord Palmerston, former British Prime Minister, once commented on it: "Only three people understood the Schleswig-Holstein Question. The first was Albert, the Prince consort and he is dead; the second is a German professor, and he is in an asylum: and the third was myself - and I have forgotten it." Such sentiment could equally apply here... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:58, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

For a while now, I've though of the Israel-Palestine conflict as the Jarndyce v. Jarndyce of modern geopolitics, an issue so complicated, with so much history, with so many different parties and so many different arguments on both all sides that the words "right", "wrong", "guilt", "justice" and "fairness" have lost all meaning. No one is innocent and no one is fully to blame, and the conflict can't be settled by finding a solution that "punishes" the "offended party", because that party simply doesn't exist. Belisarius (talk)

To be a bit contrary, has anyone else seen the following old observation, which I agree with - quoted from memory - "The really striking thing about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is how easy it is to solve" (and continued that the solution is just the 2 state -solution the OT's to the Palestinians, pre 67 Israel to Israel.) The speaker shocked his American Jewish audience, but he wasn't above a little "epater les bourgeois." John Z (talk) 11:07, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Language in Shakespeare

I'm writing a paper on the use of language in a scene from Shakespeare. Here are some approaches that I could bring to that subject. Does anyone else have any other thoughts on possible approaches?

1. I could discuss meaning: what do the words actually mean, what story are they telling?
2. I could discuss levels of meaning: what do metaphors, similes and puns mean on their metaphorical and literal levels, and what is the relationship between the two?
3. (Following my point about puns) I can discuss the use of wordplay and humour. If I wanted to be more specific I could follow Partridge/Rubinstein/Williams and focus on sex and bawdy.
4. I could discuss imagery.
5. I can identify and discuss the use of rhetorical devices, perhaps using the extensive database at Silva Rhetoricae.
6. I can discuss subtext and emotional content, and how that relates to the actual text, including how much scope there is for the actors to engage in interpretation.
7. I could follow, say, Mark Rylance, in focusing on religious, paranormal or supernatural aspects.
8. I can follow Sigmund Freud and Jacques Lacan and ask what the language tells us about the psychology of characters and/or the psychology of the writer.
9. I can deal with the words as poetry and therefore:
   1. Like Ian McKellen or Vivien Heilbron, focus on the last word of each line: establshing whether those words carry more than their share of the meaning of the scene as a whole.
   2. Like John Barton, focus on contrapunctal stresses: that is to ask whether the stresses that fall outside the normal pattern carry extra meaning.
   3. Like Antony Sher and others, view late Shakespeare like jazz music: identifying the broken stress patterns themselves as driving the sound of the poetry.

Or, you can just give me the usual thing about doing my own homework. AndyJones (talk) 11:48, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

See if you find this useful

• Analysis of the language used in its cultural setting and the audience. What common ideas, knowledge, views, etc. is the play based on?
• Compare how language would have to be changed for a different cultural setting or audience. (E.g. imagine an island population without hierarchical system. How could you explain/transpose the ideas of kings and queens? How would the Tempest work for Kalahari Bushmen?)

(N.B. This will require a lot of reading up on other cultures and languages)--76.97.245.5 (talk) 22:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Hope this helps.

All your approaches would be appropriate (if done well). It's OK to ask for homework help in this manner - you're asking about how to approach the homework. You're not asking us to do it for you, so we're not angry (well, I'm not). Some of the approaches you propose are harder than others. Discussing broken rhythms, for example, requires a good knowledge of Shakesperean use of rhythm to start with. I didn't do particularly well in this subject though, so I'll leave it for people with more experience to help you with more detail. Steewi (talk) 23:13, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Statue of Virgin Mary

In the Roman Catholic religion, what does the statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary standing on the world with snakes at her feet signify? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.26.104 (talk) 15:53, 10 January 2009 (UTC) It's the immaculate conception,she is crushing Satan(the snake) beneath her heel. http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/The_Church_Year/Immaculate_Conception.hotclaws 16:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

This is the iconic triumphalist formula connection with the alleged Marian apparition of 1830: see Catherine Labouré. The serpent connects Mary with Eve, crushing the serpent with her heel (Genesis). The serpent is an emblem of Error: we know that means us. For the demonization of the serpent, see Serpent (mythology). The image is intended to remind the viewer of its complementary opposite, Regina coeli, "Queen of Heaven", an epithet inherited from Ishtar. --Wetman (talk) 16:30, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

It also incorporates Mary-as-the-Woman-of-Revelation. - Nunh-huh 16:51, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Excellent point: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. Thank you, Nunh-huh --Wetman (talk) 18:08, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

is it sounding or side of

is it by the sounding sea or by the side of the sea —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.217.98.213 (talk) 17:27, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, the question is mroe a Language Desk question, and really depends on context, but I'll give it a go.

"By the sounding sea" could be correct if it's an unusual poem, where the sounds are the waves crashing, etc.; "sounding" would be an adjective, in this case. It's not normal English, though, as if a person wished to write of the soudns of the sea, he or she would be better off writing, "By the crashing sea," or "the turbulent sea." It is proper grammar, though, even if awkward.

So, why didn't I just automatically say "by the side of the sea" is correct? because, frankly, that doesn't sound right, either. You can be by the side of a road, but think about it; the sea is so vast, it's hard to envision it with sides the way a road has two clear sides. So, I'm not really comfortable saying that's right, becasue while it may be poetic, it's a little redundant; why not just say "by the sea"? Although, when using a certain rhyme scheme, if you need six syllables, then, by george, "side of the" are three good little syllables to throw in to make a six-syllable phrase.

Edited to add, if you'd wanted the title of something, you should have capitalized the appropriate words. The way your sentence is worded, with no capitals in the first letters of words, it doesn't look like a title. It looks like you heard something, though, and may not have heard quite well enough; can you ask the original speaker, or was this on the radio or TV somewhere?Somebody or his brother (talk) 17:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

If the OP had given us all the information . . . Poe wrote a poem called Annabel Lee of which the final two lines are controversial. I quote from our article:

There is debate on the last line of the poem. The Edgar Allan Poe Society of Baltimore, Maryland has identified 11 different versions of the poem that were published between 1849 and 1850.[9] However, the biggest variation is in the final line:

Original manuscript – In her tomb by the side of the sea

Alternative version – In her tomb by the sounding sea

The short answer is that it depends upon which version you are reading. ៛ Bielle (talk) 21:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Sherlock Holmes exists! :-) (Although I guess it wasn't that hard, I did at least mention the possibily of a poem, though I'd never call what I did a guess at it, even. And, to have solved that with so little information is amazing to me. Congratulations.)Somebody or his brother (talk) 03:16, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I own a facsimile copy of the "Hirsch C" manuscript of this poem, in Poe's own hand (and it is "In her tomb by the sounding sea" at the close). His handwriting is elegant and understated; he adds just a little extra space around the final words, like a musician taking a bit of extra time at a closing cadence, or a speaker doing so at a recitation. (Should I scan it for us?) Antandrus (talk) 19:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Antandrus: I think that would be a lovely idea as long as there are no copyright issues that might rebound to you. ៛ Bielle (talk) 22:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

technology and it's impact on jobs

Hi, is there any consensus among economists about whether technology increases or decreses the overall level of employment, or has no real effect? I'm especially interested in projections for the future, since for the moment nothing seems truly alarming. Thanks in advance, It's been emotional (talk) 18:22, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I do not think that there is a consensus on that question. There is a consensus that technology raises the mean income, but economists differ on its effect on total employment. Marco polo (talk) 01:05, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Note that total employment rates may not be really the right thing to look at—they're a pretty blunt indicator and are going to be heavily, heavily influenced by larger economic factors (not to mention that technological change is not generally equal in the sectors it effects at any given time—some may be phased out of existence altogether, others might change in subtle ways). Personally if I were looking into it I'd want to look at what the more detailed dynamics are. Do people end up working different types of jobs? Do they become deskilled? How many major career changes do they make over the course of their lives? Does technology improve or limit class mobility? etc. I suspect it is rather interesting, complicated, particular to the technologies in question, and so forth. Maybe it's the lack of economist in me but I suspect a statement of "technology increases/decreases employment" to be a little too reductionist, a little too hard to isolate from other variables (if an economy is undergoing a massive technological upgrade it'll have other effects that are not directly related to the technological aspects of it). ... As Heidegger said, the essence of technology is not technological ;-) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 03:36, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

russian short story Author/title

When I was in college approx. 35 years ago i read a short story about a fella who arrived at the end of his miserable life and pleaded for another chance to live his life again and make different (hopefully) better choices. Somehow he is given this wonderful gift however as he growsthrough childhood, teens, adult . . the memory of another life and the promise to live better in this new opportunity slip away first as some sort of murky memory, then perhaps a distant dream and at last the menmory is totally lost to time and of course he makes the same tragic mistakes as he did previously in his former life. I can't for the life of me remember the russian author or the title though i'm pretty sure the title consisted of only a man's name (russian). Any help is gratefully appreciated.Pastorpete1 (talk) 19:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

It sounds like the sort of short story that Anton Chekhov might have written, but I can't say it rings any bells with me. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps Strange Life of Ivan Osokin by P. D. Ouspensky, though that's 166 pages. --Milkbreath (talk) 22:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

January 11

Electoral vote counting

Does anyone know where the transcript of the counting of the electoral votes on 8 January, 2009 is? I checked the Congressional Record from the GPO site, it had the separate AM sessions of the two houses but not the joint session for the official count. Thanks, 216.160.50.46 (talk) 00:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

This is it, I think. --Cam (talk) 08:14, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, that doesn't work. Anyway it starts on House page H75 of the Congressional Record for January 8. --Cam (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Two Questions before making a decision. Q1 and Now what?

There was a really good quote about asking yourself two questions before making a decision. A question which I have now forgotten, and "Now what?". What is the first question? Many thanks, --Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't find a quote with the exact words "Now what?" but there is one which captures the intent: “Decide what you want, decide what you are willing to exchange for it. Establish your priorities and go to work.” by H.L. Hunt. 152.16.59.190 (talk) 06:09, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

In Saxony

I was wondering what was story behind the title Duke/Duchess in Saxony, which were held by the son and daughter of Ernestine dukes. But Queen Victoria, who married Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, was Princess of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and Duchess in Saxony; yet Infanta Antónia of Portugal, who was a Wettin female dynast in the Braganza line, was Duchess of Saxony. I also notice the sons and daughters the Albertine were Duke/Duchess of Saxony instead of in Saxony. Can anybody tell me why? --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 11:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

There's a rather thin explanation of "Duke in Bavaria/de:Herzog in Bayern", and also of "Duke in Mecklenburg/de:Herzog zu Mecklenburg" but I couldn't find one for "Duke in Saxony/Herzog zu Sachsen". If you do find out, stick it in an article somewhere. And what about "von und zu Liechtenstein"? Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

after EC::: Looks like a typo or translation issue. The German page de:Victoria (Vereinigtes Königreich) has "Prinzessin von Sachsen-Coburg und war Herzogin von Sachsen" and this "Antonia Maria Fernanda Micaela Gabriela Rafaela Francesca de Assis Ana Gonzaga Silvina Julia Augusta von Bragança und Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Infantin von Portugal" for de:Antonia Maria von Portugal. So the title is the same. There are occasionally German titles with "zu" instead of "von" but I don't know wheter there's any difference. That doesn't seem to apply here, though.--76.97.245.5 (talk) 11:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

The difference between "von" and "zu" can be conceptualized as the difference between "from" and "at", or "origin" and "possession". If the family still retains overlordship/control/ownership of the place in their surname, they get the "zu"; if they don't, they get the "von"; if they have two lines of inheritance they can be "von und zu". "Zu" is often used with a new possession of a new line to distinguish it from elder branches, especially when the younger branch obtains an entailed Majorat. Use tends to be sloppy, so you can't really depend on the use of the particles being accurate. And other uses occurred as well, with some mediatized families using "zu" as a marker of prior sovereignty. - Nunh-huh 12:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Nuhn-huh, could you add that explanation to German nobility? Thanks. AnyPerson (talk) 21:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I've added a one-sentence explanation in the introduction. - Nunh-huh 02:32, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Arab/Israeli Conflict

Can anyone recommend a good book about the conflict over the last hundred years? Something from a disinterested point-of-view, as much as such a thing is possible. 80.229.160.127 (talk) 12:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Not sure there's been a conflict for a hundred years; the Balfour declaration and the British conquest of the territory from the Ottomans didn't happen until 1917, only 91 years ago, and the first really headline-grabbing mass conflict didn't occur until 1929. AnonMoos (talk) 15:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

The European diplomacy that set up the modern state system in the Middle East, and engendered the Balfour Declaration is described in David Fromkin, A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East. Widely read and recommended. --Wetman (talk) 18:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Beginning of Confusion of the Lexeme 'Priest' or 'Priester'

When was the German lexeme Priester or the English lexeme 'priest' first used to translate kohen or hiereus? Question including modicum of background: Since the confusion by which Jewish and Christian usage may render Hebrew and Greek for either 'old man' (zaqen > presbyteros) or 'sacrificer' (kohen > hiereus) as 'priest' (originally simply 'old man', rarely a true comparative, in re instances in the LXX = OGr) seems to have been an early case of so-called 'dynamic equivalence', by which a term for a principal figure in churchdom was applied to a distinctly different principal figure in ancient israelite religion, when between the old English homilies of Aelfric (who still uses sacerd from the Latin) and the Germanic usage of Luther did this substitution occur? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billhattalmiyd (talk • contribs) 13:44, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

The Old English word was preost (a very early borrowing into Germanic from Latin, ultimately from Greek presbyter, as you mentioned), so Martin Luther had absolutely nothing to do with it. I doubt that there ever was a word in the English language with an etymology of "sacrificer" and a meaning of "Christian priest", and I'm not sure that the Hebrew word "kohen" etymologically means "sacrificer" anyway (the ordinary word for sacrificing an animal etc. in Biblical Hebrew is a verb from root q-r-b, not k-h-n). AnonMoos (talk) 15:25, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

BR20: Flags of All Nations

Reading this article, I see of a British government publication "BR20" - Google seems to throw up nothing helpful. Does anyone know where I can find out more, obtain a copy, etc.? Thanks! ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 14:36, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Googling gives an ISBN of 0117729329, the publisher is Stationery Office Books. Amazon has a CD for EUR 130, but it is not in stock. Maybe your trusted bookseller can look it up and find a source? --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 14:46, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

What is SURYA NAMASKARAM?

WHAT IS MEANT BY SURYA NAMASKARAM? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GEENA SAJITH (talk • contribs) 15:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Possibly the same thing as Surya Namaskara? Algebraist 15:10, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

both are same —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.104.212 (talk) 18:45, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

incest

IN Tamil Nadu, India, a girl can marry her uncle or uncle's son and it is not considered as a incest. What about western countries —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.104.212 (talk) 18:44, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Laws regarding incest. Strawless ^(talk) 19:32, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

(Thru edit conflict, but I'm adding because the link above mostly focuses on incest law rather than forbidden degrees of consanguinity in marriage laws, and though related, they are often legally distinct)

Most Western countries would permit the marriage of first cousins (the girl you describe and her uncle's son), but most would prohibit the marriage of an uncle and niece. There are exceptions.

In the U.S.: uncle/niece marriages are usually banned, the exception being Rhode Island, which permits uncle/niece (but not aunt/nephew) marriages - but only for Jews - because the former is not forbidden in Leviticus. [21]. Colorado and Minnesota follow the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act in exempting uncle-niece marriages that are "permitted by the established customs of aboriginal cultures." But it would astonish most Americans to learn that such marriages are permitted. Some states ban first cousin marriages, others restrict them, others permit them freely: see the list at [22]

In the UK: see Marriage (Prohibited Degrees of Relationship) Act 1986. For the original list of forbidden marriages: [23]: bans uncle/niece, permits first cousin marriage.

In France: [24] - Nunh-huh 19:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

See also cousin couple for more background info. In some places, times, and cultures, first cousins are forbidden from marrying (largely for reasons of consanguinity); in others it is encouraged. Ah, the rich tapestry of human diversity! BrainyBabe (talk) 20:49, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

As we discovered before on the ref desk, in Australia it is legal to marry your uncle. Gwinva (talk) 00:29, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Only if you're a woman... - Nunh-huh 06:14, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

In Canada, the Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act is very short and simple: the only people prohibited from marrying are those who are whole or half brothers/sisters or are linearly related (i.e. parent/child, grandchild, great-grandchild, etc.), whether naturally or by adoption. So if two people are otherwise free to marry, then marriage to a niece, nephew, or first cousin is legal. --Anonymous, 01:12 UTC, 01/12, 2009.

In Ancient China, people could marry cousins on their mother's side freely, but not their father's side. bibliomaniac15 03:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

radiation

we have a cellsite on our rooftop,is it dangerous to our health especially our reproductive system? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zareann (talk • contribs) 22:49, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

some people said that the radiation range of cellsites is very low should not affect anyone,some says we can still get pregnant, not really sterile but there will be deformities,i need a concrete answer

The article mobile phone radiation and health, including many references, may be of interest to you. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:34, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

paris to monacco?

i live in paris. how much could i expect to pay (roughyl) for return train tickets to monacco? am i allowed to travel there freely with eu citizenship? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.124.85.178 (talk) 22:54, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

You can check Rail Europe's website for a good idea of cost information. Costs will vary according to several factors. 152.16.16.75 (talk) 01:07, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know how true it is, but Rail Europe has a reputation for only showing the more expensive fares, so as to induce tourists to buy rail passes. If you're already in Paris, why not ask at a travel agent or railway station? --Anonymous, 01:15 UTC, clarified 01:17, January 12, 2009.

The exact price of your ticket will vary depending on what time your train leaves and perhaps how far in advance you purchase your ticket. I checked the price for a return ticket leaving three weeks from today and returning four weeks from today and found that you can get return tickets traveling at a reasonable time of day for about €120. If you are comfortable with French you can look up the cost of your itinerary and even book your tickets at SNCF.com. According to our article Microstates and the European Union, Monaco is effectively part of the Schengen area, so there is no passport or identity control to enter Monaco from France, and you should be able to enter Monaco from France without difficulty regardless of your nationality or immigrant status. Marco polo (talk) 01:23, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

January 12

children's book about little girl making footsteps in the flour?

I need help trying to remember a book from my childhood. I'm 29 in 2009, so that would be 1980 – 1990 roughly. I don't remember much, maybe not enough for an identification.

It's very murky. It was about a little girl. I think she might have been a little ghost or a witch. Or witch in training. Or maybe not. I only can remember this one scene, and only dimly. The girl had gotten into some house she was not supposed to be in. Maybe she was hiding in a barrel full of flour. Or somehow there was flour in the story. I remember the footprints through the flour which covered the room. Either she walked through the flour or else she saw someone else's footprints.

The illustrations might have been black and white, or if not, they were generally dark. I thought it might have been an Edward Gorey book, but I've been looking through his list of publications on Amazon and nothing looks right. Maybe I'm just making that association because he also publishes books with macabre black and white illustrations.

So that's it. Little girl, hiding in barrel in house, footprints in the flour. Ring any bells?

you want us to psychoanalyze you? Obviously, the problem is with your husband, who does not treat you as an adult.

NO idea. The idea of the footprints in the flour, however, is one of the stories in the Tristan and Iseult cycle. СПУТНИК^{CCC P} 13:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

What religion

I was talking about the BBC program Around the World in 80 Faiths with a fiend and we remember that the first program had an minor Abrahamic faith whose members followed John the Baptist. Their ceremonies included baptism every week and the members looked as though they were of middle-eastern origin. The program showed a large group of followers of this faith somewhere in Australia (Sydney?). We cannot remember what this faith is called! Can any wikipedians help? -- Q Chris (talk) 12:12, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, can't help, missed that bit of the programme, but I can't help thinking it must be fun to discuss comparative religion with a fiend. ;-) Itsmejudith (talk) 13:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I've never seen the program but to me that sounds like Mandaeism. I don't know if there are so many of them in Sydney, but that's my guess. There are only so many Abrahamic faiths ;-) СПУТНИК^{CCC P} 13:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)