Humanities desk
< April 28	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 30 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 29

how to (not) throw out a tenant?

Yes, I know that this is not a legal service, that nothing is binding, etc. etc. etc. That being said, I still have a question: My friend has lived without a lease (= oral agreement) in an apartment in Massachusetts for 4 years now. Now her landlord wants her to move out and already has a new tenant. She has paid the rent on time, there's no problem with the apartment etc. Is it "legal" nonetheless to throw her out? And if so--what does the landlord really need to tell her, so it's all correct? ... and if he doesn't, does she still have to move out?

[She wanted to move out in a few months anyways, but it's ultra-inconvenient for her to move right now. So far, the landlord was unwilling to even talk about it, so "negotiations" seem difficult or impossible.]

I'd appreciate any advice or link to more information etc. (incl. links to relevant Wikipedia articles of course!). As she isn't American either, she's pretty clueless about what's going on! Thanks so much!!! --72.242.67.89 (talk) 05:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.76.89 (talk) [reply]

Try here, especially chapter 13 - evictions. Offhand, a landlord can't just throw a tenant out without giving a certain amount of notice. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if this is relevant, but in the UK the landlord needs to give 8 weeks' notice, but the tenant can still appeal if he/she does not want to move out yet. This is to prevent homelessness (and, on a side note, homelessness itself is borderline illegal in the UK - work that one out!).--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 05:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Homelessness is illegal? Are you referring to vagrancy laws? You can quite easily be homeless without being vagrant. --Tango (talk) 09:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry, I didn't mean just NFA, but actually getting ASBOs for constantly sleeping in the same bus shelter or airport or other public place, as if not having your own private place precludes you from sleeping in a public place. Silly, really.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 14:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the landlord flat out throwing the tenant out instead of requiring the tenant to sign a written lease, requring a rent raising, etc. as an alternative? Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 09:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most jurisdictions in the USA require written notice and 30 days, regardless of whether there is a written lease or not. If your friend is not getting either of those, they may want to seek legal help. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 13:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your friend is what is called a "tenant at will" in Massachusetts, and the landlord can legally end her tenancy in writing with 30 days' notice. That said, a landlord cannot legally evict any tenant in Massachusetts; only a court can do that, and the court process typically takes a few months. This does not constitute legal advice, and your friend should consult an attorney if she wants it. (That said, it so happens I used to be a tenant organizer in Massachusetts.) Marco polo (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This question is too specific and answering it borders on legal advice. Look up information on tenancy or find materials on Massachusetts law, but people here cannot answer real world legal scenarios for people. To do so violates WP policy and possibly violates the law. Shadowjams (talk) 01:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I might recommend contacting a lawyer who specializes in tenant-landlord disputes. If you don't know any, contact your state's chapter of the American Bar Association. Pastor Theo (talk) 01:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind anything you do at this point with the landlord needs to be put in WRITING. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 02:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Northern regiments and recruits for Confederate military

What are the statistics for non-CSA volunteers in their cause? I have seen a couple of Wikipedia biographies of individual northerners having participated on the CSA side, but I am curious more about the state origins and proportions. Catterick (talk) 07:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surprised no Civil War buff has answered yet. I don't know any numbers myself - but you may need to clarify your question. There were several regiments of Confederates from the border states so you get units designated 5th Regiment Kentucky Volunteer Infantry (CSA) and 5th Regiment Kentucky Volunteer Infantry (Union). You can look through the Lists of American Civil War regiments by state for more of these. On the other hand, you can see the opposite, for instance, List of Arkansas Union Civil War units. Rmhermen (talk) 19:03, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's also Confederate units of Indian Territory. Oklahoma was not a state, of course. Its role in the war was complicated, see Indian Territory in the American Civil War. Although our article does not say so, I am of the understanding that at least some of the Confederate Indian units changed sides during the course of the war. Pfly (talk) 06:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for statistics of Copperheads and other Doughface participation on behalf of the South, by military service, or independent regiments other than Maryland (e.g. those from NY or New England or Midwest), which was normally accounted for as Southern. Were there any foreign regiments fighting for the South too, such as from Canada, Mexico or overseas? Gadsden, Arizona 01:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

King of the Franks

The Kings of France stopped calling themselves Kings of the Franks around the reign of Philip IV or Louis IX. But when did the Kings of Middle and Eastern Francia stop calling themselves King of the (East/Middle) Franks?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 08:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they called themselves that to begin with, they are just modern conventions to describe what they ruled. Middle Francia, which was very short-lived anyway, was similar to the later Kingdom of Burgundy, and East Francia later became the Holy Roman Empire, which also included the titles of King of Bavaria and King of the Lombards. But I doubt they used the title "rex mediae Franciae" or anything like that. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've always been kind of fond of the names Austrasia and Neustria (which were used at the time). AnonMoos (talk) 10:50, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah those are good, and since they are the Merovingian names, we could also say they stopped using those titles when they were overthrown (although the Carolingians seem to have used them too). Adam Bishop (talk) 22:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Kingdom of the Middle Franks was Lotharingia. It lasted only a few decades, but our article seems to indicate that it was known by that name, or its latin equivalent "Lotharii Regnum" during its existance. West Francia was a general geographic name which constantly shifted borders and kingdoms. Neustria and Aquitaine and various other "subkingdoms" likely existed througout the area. Our article Duke of the Franks, or dux francorum indicates that the name "France" itself likely evolved from a later version of the title, which was dux Franciae or literally "Duke of France" which as a title preceded the King of France as a title by some years. Originally, "France" only referred to what is now "Ile de France", i.e. Paris and its environs. The transformation from "Duke of the Franks" to "Duke of France" came about apparently by decendants of Robert the Strong, Margrave of Neustria. His son Odo apparently used the titles "King of West Francia" and "Duke of France" and a Great Grandson of Robert the Strong was apparently Hugh Capet, who inherited the Duke of France title from his father Hugh the Great and when he became King, he simply combined the two titles into King of France, so Hugh Capet is probably the first to think of himself as "King of France" rather than "King of West Francia". --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the Eastern Franks/East Francia, it seems likely that transition occured with Henry the Fowler who successed Conrad of Franconia as King, and seems to have been the first to use the term King of Germany or rex Teutonicorum rather than King of East Francia. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt Grunwald

I am searching the year the Israeli Scholar Kurt Grunwald died. He was born in 1901 in Hamburg, Germany and migrated to Palestine in 1921 and later live in Jerusalem. He wrote some books on economic history. I wanted to include this information in an article about his father, the rabbi de:Max Grunwald. --Catrin (talk) 09:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He lived to be at least 80: [1] (if that's the right person). An editor who reads Hebrew might have more luck than I did searching the website of his university, Hebrew University of Jerusalem - there seem to be a few scholarships in his name and there might be a date there. If no luck here you could try the language desk. Sorry, that's where I stuck. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He died at 88 in 1989. Here's an obituary in the Jerusalem Post.John Z (talk) 21:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That was the idea i didnt had. :-). --Catrin (talk) 19:27, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

d-day

Why is june 6 1944 called as 'd-day'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.192.138.93 (talk) 12:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at the article D-Day and the article D-Day (military term) for the answer. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 13:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The articles don't quite make this point explicit: Although D-Day is a generic term associated with many military operations, this particular one was so important and so strongly anticipated that everyone wanted to know when it would happen. To borrow a phrase from another war, this was the "mother of all D-Days", so it still gets called by that phrase today. In the same way, people also sometimes talked about "V-Day" (victory day), the day the war would end, before it happened. When it became clear that the war in Europe would end before the war against Japan, people talked about VE-Day before it happened. --Anonymous, 05:10 UTC, May 1, 2009.

disintegration of soviet union

I am making a project on what indias policy should be after disintegration? Should india change its forein policy and focus more on friendship with us rather than with traditional friends like russia?118.95.66.220 (talk) 13:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but the reference desk can't answer the title questions to whole projects - advising the Indian Foreign Office is a big job :-) Is there a narrower question we can help you with? 78.33.187.170 (talk) 14:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What you could do, 118.95.66.220, is start with the article Soviet Union, which explains how the Soviet Union broke up in 1991. That should help you clarify whether you want to write about India and the Soviet Union 18 years ago, or whether your project should be about India and Russia today. Next, read India–Russia relations, which gives an overview of India's foreign policy towards both the Soviet Union before 1991, and towards Russia after 1991. Then read India – United States relations so you can compare and decide if Indian relations with Russia are the same or different with Indian relations with the US. Finally, look at Foreign relations of India for other ideas about India's policies towards other nations. Then, as 78.33.187.170 said, come back if you have a specific question that you need help finding references for. Good luck, WikiJedits (talk) 14:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"focus more on friendship with us rather than with traditional friends like russia". Depends who you mean by 'us'. We have no idea where you are from.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 14:32, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I should think the OP probably means the US. That's what you get for not using capital letters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.251.196.62 (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might focus the project on what the status of the Non-Aligned Movement is in an era without two superpowers. Does it even make sense? In the West it is common to see the NAM as being a way to play off of the power of each side (flirt with one so the other one tries to win you back). Does losing a side change that dynamic? (Or have the sides switched around? Or...?) --98.217.14.211 (talk) 02:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nowadays, the "Non-Aligned Movement" is really just another "G" group, like the G77, G90, etc. etc. (and it's not even the most important non-major-power G-group). AnonMoos (talk) 11:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Goliath (WW2 weapon)

Was the 'Goliath' (a little tiny tracked remote control device that seems to serve no purpose whatsoever in the game I am playing) an actual WW2 'weapon'? And which side produced it and used it? In the game Company of Heroes both the Germans and the Americans seem to have the exact same machine.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 16:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Goliath tracked mine. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 16:08, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

King Otto of Greece

Could he speak Modern Greek? --Lazar Taxon (talk) 19:43, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Amalia of Oldenburg article says that after their exile "they determined to speak in Greek each day between 6 and 8 o'clock to remember their time in Greece." If that's true then they may have learned a little while they were there; or maybe they knew some Attic Greek, assuming they were relatively well-educated ninteenth-century European nobles. I think it's pretty unlikely that they could speak Greek fluently, especially considering that Otto's article says the Greeks called his reign the "Bavarocracy". (By the way, Googling this turns up a lot of nonsense from Macedonians and Albanians about Greek not being spoken at all in Greece at the time, so apparently that problem is not unique to Wikipedia...) Adam Bishop (talk) 02:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Greek is counted from the fall of the Byzantine Empire (1453), although of course many new words have come into it since. However, the official written language of law and government was much closer to Ancient Greek than to Modern, being more formal and complex in grammar. Modern was made the official language of Greece in 1976. As Otto became King of Greece in 1832, he lived well into the Modern language period. However, at only 18 years old, with no prior diplomatic experience, it is likely that he spoke NO Greek at all when he arrived. He reigned for 30 years, so had opportunity to learn some. What he DID speak would undoubtedly have been Modern Greek. KoolerStill (talk) 10:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heiresses apparent to peerage titles

I'd like to know more about female heirs apparent to lordships, baronies, and earldoms created by writ of summons. Let's say that a certain woman is the only child of a man who is the eldest son of a peer (whose title has been created by writ of summons). In theory, if her father dies before her grandparent, then she could not be displaced in the order of succession by any possible birth, which would make her heir apparent. I would like to know if something like that actually happened. I've came across the example of Georgiana Maxwell, 27th Baroness de Ros, who was the eldest daughter of the eldest son of the 26th Baroness de Ros. Then I remebered that she was never heiress apparent because she had sisters and the titles fell into abeyancy. A good example is Frances Ward, 6th Baroness Dudley, the only daughter of the eldest son of Edward Sutton, 5th Baron Dudley. However, Frances Ward, 6th Baroness Dudley redirects to the article about her husband and there is little I can find out about her. So, it's possible for a woman to be heiress apparent even when the succession law prefers males, but could you think of any other examples that would confirm this theory? Surtsicna (talk) 20:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A living example:Queen Elizabeth II who succeeded to the throne despite her father having two younger brothers Duke of Kent, Duke of Gloucester). The phrase is heiress presumptive, since there is always the possibility of a male heir appearing.--TammyMoet (talk) 20:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what I meant. Please read more carefully. Elizabeth II would have succeed to the throne regardless of how many uncles she had. She was indeed heiress presumptive, but I'm not asking about that. I know that a daughter of a peer can never be heiress apparent, but a granddaughter can. Imagine this situation: a man who is heir apparent to a title dies leaving behind one daughter. Since he was the eldest son, it doesn't matter how many brothers he has (or gets after his death), because his daughter now represents him and his line. Obviously, she can't have any more agnatic siblings because her father is dead (presuming that her mother is not pregnant at the time of his death, of course) and her uncles are behind her because her father was older than them. That makes her heiress apparent. I just need some examples besides those mentioned above. Surtsicna (talk) 20:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to go right ahead and doubt your premise. If we have Father (holder of the title), Son 1 (Heir apparent), Son 2, and Daughter of Son 1 ... and Son 1 dies before Father dies, then surely Son 2 will inherit? That does mean that yes, I'm doubting your examples. However this is just an expression of doubt; I'm not knowledgeable in this area. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's right only if we are talking about Salic law which excludes all females, but I stressed out that I'm talking about succession to peerage titles created by writ of summons (which can pass to females and through females). Take George III of Great Britain for example. He became heir apparent to his grandfather when his father died, although he had had an uncle. If the Prince of Wales dies before his mother, Prince William of Wales would become new heir apparent. The new heir apparent would not be his uncle, the Duke of York, because William is the eldest son of the eldest son of the Sovereign while Andrew is a younger son of the Sovereign. That's what primogeniture is all about. Since Son 1 doesn't have any sons of his own, his daughter is his heir and therefore his father's heir too. Surtsicna (talk) 21:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas (4th Baron Wentworth, 1st Baron Wentworth of Nettlested, 1st & last Earl of Cleveland of the 1626 creation) married Anne Crofts and had an only son, Thomas. The son married Philadelphia Carey, daughter of Sir Ferdinando Carey, had an only daughter, and died in his father's lifetime. The daughter, Henrietta Wentworth, succeeded her grandfather in the Barony of Wentworth.

So she was heiress apparent to the barony between March 1664/5 (her father's death) and March 1667 (her grandfather's death). - Nunh-huh 22:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Similar situations can also occur with Scottish peerages in remainder to heirs-general. In either case, a male heir apparent must die and leave female issue. Since peerages conveyed by writs of summons can fall into abeyance, a daughter becomes a heir apparent only if she is the only daughter. In the case of Scottish peerages, the eldest daughter of the deceased heir apparent will become the new heir apparent. Choess (talk) 19:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Choess! Do you have any examples? Surtsicna (talk) 21:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actress from 'Slumdog Millionaire' (the older girl)

What's her name and is there some information about her anywhere?--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 21:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Imdb.com is your friend. They have a full cast list on their site. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1010048/ I haven't seen it so aren't sure which is the 'older girl' character but should be easy enough to figure out if you've seen it. ny156uk (talk) 21:13, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Freida Pinto? --Tango (talk) 21:14, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or Tanvi Ganesh Lonkar, the second of the 3 actresses to play her? (Pinto was the 3rd and oldest.) Since there are 3, I'm not sure to whom "older" refers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maltelauridsbrigge (talk • contribs) 14:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, yes, it was the middle one. Thanks!--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 19:39, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And for my article I am actually trying to find out her birthday, which does not seem to appear anywhere. Can anyone provide me with some links here?--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Japan's Civil War

I'm doing a report on the civil war in Japan between 1333 AD and 1392 AD, and I can't find information anywhere. Can anyone help? <(^_^)> Pokegeek42 (talk) 23:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Muromachi period and more specifically Nanboku-chō period are good starting points. The second one, particularly, has a big list of books you can look for, either in print or parts of them in GoogleBooks, and the other has a link to the public domain source for the article. Japanese history is fascinating. Good luck on your report! Steewi (talk) 23:49, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's article on the Kenmu restoration might be a good place to start; it seems to talk about the background and has links to other events and people of the period. Adam Bishop (talk) 23:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. <(^_^)> Pokegeek42 (talk) 21:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]