Humanities desk
< January 14	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 16 >

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.

January 15

A book that describes the use of submachine guns some two hundred years before they were invented?

I Remember reading it as a child But forgot the title. any help greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.193.49 (talk) 01:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Submachine guns are a late 19th century invention, although James Puckle patented an early machine-gun in 1718, nearly two hundred years before. So the book would need to date from the late 17th century. Who were the most inventive writers of the age? Grimmelshausen, Madame de La Fayette, Aphra Behn, William Congreve? A bit later, Daniel Defoe, perhaps, but I'm afraid this is beyond me. Xn4 (talk) 03:29, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I interpreted the question to be about a relatively recent Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court sort of book where someone took machine guns back in time, rather than a two hundred year old novel, since not many kids read two hundred year old books. --Sean 12:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Something like Guns of the South? 208.1.253.163 (talk) 13:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like one of Harry Turtledove's alternate histories (Timeline-191). See List of fictional timelines, perhaps for other possibilities. S. M. Stirling is another author who likes alternate history. See also 1632 (novel). Steewi (talk) 22:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or better yet, List of alternate history fiction. Steewi (talk) 22:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wine

What happens to the crushed grapes in wine? When the grape juice is fermenting, are the grapes there as well? So then, is the grape mush rendered inedible and toxic?96.53.149.117 (talk) 04:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See pomace. ---Sluzzelin talk 09:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also Lees (fermentation). Itsmejudith (talk) 10:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Israel bans "Arab political parties"?

Glenn Greenwald today mentioned "Israel's banning of Arab political parties." Can anyone furnish some more information on this? I can't find anything pertinent at List of political parties in Israel. --zenohockey (talk) 05:02, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Israel disqualifies Arab parties, from the BBC, Monday, 12 January 2009. Google News pointers to another 300+ stories on the issue. We have coverage at Israeli legislative election, 2009#Parties. Apparently the same two parties were banned in 2003, a decision reversed in the courts. --Tagishsimon (talk) 05:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. Thanks much. --zenohockey (talk) 08:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is a government still considered a democracy if the 90% ethnic majority in the legislature votes 90%-10% not to allow the ethnic 20% of the population with the 10% share of legislative seats to field candidates in the election? Edison (talk) 20:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They didn't say they can't field candidates, just not under those parties. Note: I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the action. AnyPerson (talk) 23:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly the problem that happened in Northern Ireland which was a protestant state for a protestant people. And the present peace didn't come about until Tony Blair decided not to go upholding democracy all the time with Britain's money but make it in their interests to come to an agreement with each other. Normally it isn't a big problem because people are happy to have just the power their numbers should command, it's only when outside parties interfere that there's a real problem with a distortion in relative power. Dmcq (talk) 13:21, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is referred to as the 'dictatorship of the majority' but we don't seem to have a article on it Dmcq (talk) 14:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tyranny of the majority? Fribbler (talk) 14:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - thanks Dmcq (talk)

Technical terms are Ethnic democracy, Ethnocracy, Herrenvolk democracy etc. Israel is more democratic by most measures than all or almost all Arab countries (including the Palestinian Authority under Arafat), but there are certain structural factors which limit the influence of Arabs within the Israeli system (such as non-Bedouin non-Druze Arabs being pretty much absent from the Israeli army, while the Israeli army plays an extremely important social role within Israeli society, and military veterans have priority entitlement to many benefits and privileges), and there are certain "red lines" which are not permitted to be crossed within the Israeli political system (of course, a few like Azmi Bishara make a point of being seen to be crossing such red lines as often as possible, which makes for good theatrical drama and many cheers from the gallery of his fervent supporters, but is not the way to consolidate practical influence in Israeli politics). AnonMoos (talk) 00:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Constantine Andreou's awards

As per Constantine_Andreou#Awards, he became a Commander of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres in 2001 and an Officer four years later in 2005. But Commander is the highest grade, Officer is a lower one. How could he go from a higher to a lower grade, or is there an error in the article? The references provided are all Greek and French to me! Jay (talk) 11:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I read French but not Greek. The Order doesn't seem to have an archive that goes back to 2001, so I was unable to find out about any award he might have received then. The constitution of the Order says nothing that would indicate that the sequence of events you describe is possible. You have to step up a grade at a time, with five years' tenure at each step, except for two situations: Officers and commanders in the Legion of Honor are automatically granted the same title in the Order. (Andreou's awards include Knight of the Legion, in 2000. If he soon after advanced in the Legion to commander, that would explain the jump to that rank in the Order, but that 2005 award of officer leaves me puzzled.) The other way to jump to commander, I think (the wording is unclear), is to be a foreigner who doesn't live in France—foreigners deemed worthy of membership in the Order can be named commanders (again, I think. Um...Sharon Stone????). The "Andreou" article says he left France to live in Greece in 2002, meaning that in 2001 when he supposedly became a commander he didn't qualify for the foreigner's exemption. Bottom line, it's still a mystery. --Milkbreath (talk) 13:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article on the order only states 2005 as the year where Constantine Andreou was nominated for officer. The official site states that in 2005 he has been promoted to the grade of an officer, which implies that he had been a knight previously. The French WP states 2001 for commander, the German WP says 2002 (it has 2001 for Croix de Chevalier de la Légion d`honneur), the Greek WP has 2000 for Chevalier / Légion d`honneur and 2001 for Commandeur de l'Ordre des Arts et des Lettres. Same for the Spanish and the Suomi WP.

Kimon Andreou, his nephew, in a blog has the same data as the English WP, ie Commandeur 2001 and Officier in 2005. As he includes a link to the en:WP article, he may have copied the data. Kimon Andreou can be contacted here [1]. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 16:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is Kimon Andreou the same as User:Kimon who has made several edits to the Constantine Andreou article, including this one which is the contention we're discussing? Jay (talk) 12:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep - one and the same. I only found this discussion as I was getting referrer hits from Wikipedia on my blog and had no idea why. I have been off of Wikipedia for a *very* long time with no immediate plans to return to editing due to personal reasons.

In any case, the data did seem strange to me too when I was entering it but, I had copied it from a publication of the Teloglion foundation of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. I figured they'd know better than me. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to ask my uncle before he died to clarify (I wonder if that would've been considered OR?).

Anyway, I'll be monitoring this thread for a couple more days but if anyone wants to contact me can do so via email. If anyone can figure out the accurate sequence of events, please edit the article appropriately and I'll follow suit on the blog. --Kimon^talk 17:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking that until this is cleared up, to remove the "Commandeur" entry. Especially since the official online record only lists the 2005 award. I'll go ahead and remove that entry pending someone clarifying it (or me getting my hands on my uncle's paperwork). --Kimon^talk 14:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Order and Disorder in Hamlet.

This is an essay question, and i know i need to do it myself but id like some ideas of what to include in my answer.

Katy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.160.135 (talk) 15:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could start by reading the play titled Hamlet, by William Shakespeare. Its at least tangentally related to this question, and may contain some ideas for you to include in your essay. Then, if you are looking for additional ideas, you could read our article on Hamlet as well as another article we have entitled Critical approaches to Hamlet. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A good approach to start with, once you've read the play would be to consider each of the main characters and conside whether they are an agent of order or chaos in the story, or are they both? Then consider the biggest events of the play. Which events brought order to the kingdom of Denmark? Which ones where the biggest catalysts of bringing about the chaotic ending? Are there any soliloquys or quotations about order and chaos in the play? Reread the play, keeping an eye out for quotes that help bring the idea into perspective. If you can answer those questions well in your essay, you'll almost definitely pass. Steewi (talk) 23:02, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you read, keep a big pad of paper at your elbow: copy out every statement that describes order or disorder, with act , scene, line number, so that you can locate it again: "the time is out of joint: I.v.188" etc. and weave many quotes into your essay, to support the points you'll be making. Good practice for writing Wikipedia articles too. --Wetman (talk) 00:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Political Rivals

You guys don't have a list of political rivals of each nation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.204.74.19 (talk) 19:04, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of political parties by United Nations geoscheme is a list of lists, which allows you to drill down. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've from Canada so I expect you know this but if not, as people have mentioned above many countries don't have the two party system that predominates in the US. While you could argue al political parties are 'rivals' of each other, often it's a lot more complicated then that. For example, in NZ the Green Party is usually consider to the left of Labour. Realisticly despite some occasional noise to the contrary, the chance of them having an agreement with a National led government is slim. Similarly, ACT is to the right of National and the chance of them ever having an agreement with a Labour led government is slim (even if it was started by former Labour members). Yet both parties have once or twice agreed with each other on some issue (if not in reasons at least in the vote) against other parties. Nil Einne (talk) 14:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Famous People Who Have Wikipedia Accounts

The other day, I saw a post on Wikipedia by Amy Fisher. In the past, I've seen a post by a member of REO Speedwagon on the aforementioned talk page and once saw a post by Peter Gabriel but it turned out to be another site. Out of curiosity, is there a list of famous people who have Wikipedia accounts? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 21:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We have Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles. Algebraist 21:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remember, anyone can establish an account under a name that might seem to be famous.-- Wetman (talk) 00:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Edison (talk) 15:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ex cathedra: literally?

For a statement by the Pope to be considered ex cathedra, would he have to sit in his throne to pronounce it? Or would he only need to attach "this is ex cathedra" to his statement? The ex cathedra section of our Papal infallibility article doesn't discuss the question. Nyttend (talk) 21:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article you have linked to says: The "chair" referred to is not a literal chair, but refers metaphorically to the pope's position, or office, as the official teacher of Catholic doctrine, which should answer your first question. Afaik, such "ex cathedra" statements are extremely rare, the last is assumed to have been Munificentissimus Deus (Pope Pius XII) in 1950. Bear in mind that ex cathedra statements are not the sole means by which the RC church can invoke infallibility of its teachings. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And it's never as clear cut as a pope saying words to the effect of "What I'm about to pontificate upon will be spoken infallibly". Theologians still debate which (if any) of the pronouncements of the popes are meant to be put into the "Infallible" box and which into the "Other" box. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, the WP equivalent to an ex cathedra pontification is the WP:reference desk, where numerous volunteer pontifexes dispense infallible truthinesses 24/7. Divisionally, this results in a rate of 3.42 (note the prime 42 !), the remaining 96.57 % being negligible bugs in our partial omniscience. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 00:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually "pontifices" (if I may say so ex cathedraically). Adam Bishop (talk) 02:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*woosh!* --Tango (talk) 02:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase in question would be more generic than specific application to a Roman pontifex maximus suggests. It evolved from the chair (Greek kathedra > Latin sella) located on the raised floor (Greek bema > Latin tribunal), often found at the inner end of a basilica, where any high Hellenistic, then susequently Roman, official might sit to render judgment or issue an official decree (edictum). Since the polity of churchdom was early modelled on governmental power structures, any bishop might occupy his own cathedra (Latin transliteration from Greek). Hence comes the expression 'cathedral church'. It therefore originally did refer to any pronouncement thus rendered authentic. Cf. also English 'see', transliteration of Latin sedes 'seat', which has an analogous origin.Billhattalmiyd (talk) 12:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ethics question

Let’s say an anonymous person gives an organization the right to print and use their words (a personal account for instance). Is it ethical to then use those words in a artistic work if you have permission from the organization who owns the rights? --143.44.71.9 (talk) 22:44, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The permission from the person for the organization to use their words may not necessarily mean that the organization can permit third parties to use them. This is not legal advice, just a commonsense observation. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It depends entirely on how the work is liscenced, who has the liscence to the work (the author or the company he worked for), etc. etc. There is just too many variables to be able to give a definitive answer given the rather general information you have given here. Unfortunately, even if you asked a more specific question, it would probably beg for some form of legal advice, which is probably verboten here. If you have any genuine concerns, contact a lawyer who works in this field, or better yet, the author AND company you allude to directly. They will let you know straight up. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the question is about ethics, rather than law. Though the law ought to be ethical, sometimes even though you have the legal right to do something, it may not be the right thing to do. So, in general terms, it is not, in my world, ethical to use someone else's words for any purpose (no matter how artistic, and no matter whether or not money is earned from this use) without that person's specific permission to do so and without giving the person whatever credit the permission requires. I am not here talking about who owns what, but rather who created what. YMMV. ៛ Bielle (talk) 02:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bielle is right that this is an ethical, rather than a legal, question, though of course there may be legal implications to the acts involved in the original question. I would strongly advise that no-one ever consult a lawyer for ethical advice. DuncanHill (talk) 02:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, that copyright permission needs to be given by the holder of the copyright, not people who have received a one-off (even repeated) permission or licence themselves. Depending on where you are, you could find it helpful to check out the law advice centre for artists in Australia[2]] on the ins and outs of copyright and appropriating material. It's an interesting area because you can appropriate/use stuff while a student, for example, that is not permitted when you aren't. Julia Rossi (talk) 02:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is very helpful. Thank you. How would you view a situation in which an individual gives an organization their words with the express desire that that organization disseminate them and make use of them in whatever way will help a specific cause? I’m thinking of, for instance, someone who speaks to UNFPA with the intention of helping to end genocide, honor killings, infanticide—something of that nature. I can also see the argument that there is implied personal consent there. . . It may also be very hard to FIND such a person for very good reasons. Thank you for your time gentlepeople. --143.44.71.9 (talk) 03:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We could do endless variations on a theme here and still not have answered your question. If you have a specific situation in mind, as you appear to do, why not give us all the information and we can then, perhaps, make meaningful commentary about the ethics? ៛ Bielle (talk) 04:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above seems like a fairly specific (and for artists, rather common) situation to me. . What other details would make a difference? The instance I’m currently thinking about is with UNFPA permission material. --143.44.71.9 (talk) 04:11, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This statement "an individual gives an organization their words with the express desire that that organization disseminate them and make use of them in whatever way will help a specific cause" could mean a number of different things, for example. How does one "give words"? Were they published words, or transcribed from a recording of a speech? Were they written specifically for this cause in a contract situation, or were they written for another purpose and then adapeted for this cause? How is the "express desire" expressed? Are you talking about detailed permission evidenced in writing, about a reported conversation or a conversation to which you were a party? Is the "artistic work" in which these words will be used also being given to the cause for its use in the same campaign? There is a difference, I would suggest, between taking a personal account of, say, an act of genocide, that has been reported in writing to an international body, and quoting that account (all or substatially all) in a publication being produced by that same body for the same ends, and privately absorbing the same material into a publication under another individual's name. Even if, in the latter case, the second individual, the artist, intends the same objective and accredits the source, there is still a personal benefit that arises from using someone else's work. What I would understand in the first case as probably being acceptable, I would not, in the second. This is all hypothetical and likely now a branch too far. It is difficult to discuss the ethics of a situation without the details. That was my only point. ៛ Bielle (talk) 06:18, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The main thing afaican see is: "you have permission from the organisation who owns the rights". Permission comes from the owner of the copyright, which in your example may not necessarily be the source – permission/license is required from the owner of the copyright. When a person gives their story or words to an organisation in a "free release" way, then the organisation owns the copyright and can give permission afaik. You may need to see a form of that "free release" in writing if possible. If the organisation doesn't have ownership, you might try to find the "author" or the material to get permission to use their words, and if you can't find them after you have done your best, a disclaimer to that effect is the usual thing. It's possible the artwork is yours to create after that. Again check with a legal person to make sure. Btw, a license may have a time or use limit on it and there's usually a fee...

The problem for me is the use of the word "ethical". The thing that bites you on the bottom is the legalities of using and "publishing"/exhibiting, and claiming authorship, rather than the ethics of an action. Ethics may include making some/any proceeds from using the artwork available to the organisation or that person to help them in some way. That's a different area. Unethics is benefiting from someone without exchange. As a last resort you may try to fictionalise or make composite a number of stories to get the gist into your work (seeking permission and then running it past them for approval perhaps, though I don't know if this would be strictly necessary, it's ethical which means it's up to you). How you handle this may influence whether they are willing to work with you next time.Julia Rossi (talk) 06:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NHL player stats against specific teams

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am searching for a website where you can view the stats of NHL players against specific teams during their career. These are shown on the player profiles of team websites before the games, but unfortunately they are changed after the event. For example: Career vs. LAK: 64 games played 7 goals 38 assists... 24.202.236.203 (talk) 22:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would have said that your best starting point would be the Elias Sports Bureau (homepage: http://www.esb.com/ ), given that they are the official statiticians for ESPN. You know all those insane stats "So and so scores 2.5% more goals on Tuesdays under a full moon" that sort of stuff? Well, that's usuall Elias that comes up with that stuff. Unfortunately, their homepage pretty much sucks. Other statistics services include STATS, Inc. (homepage: http://www.stats.com/ ) which has a better website; unfortunately access to their data is by subscription, and it doesn't look like the data you want is provided by them in a public forum, though they are pretty much the #2, after ESB, sports stats company in America. You could also check the NHL's official website: http://www.nhl.com/ but it does not appear that they have that data either. Wish I coulda been more help. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could try The Internet Hockey Database Wolfgangus (talk) 02:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]