Humanities desk
< June 3	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 5 >

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.

June 4

UK constituencies

Anyone know of anywhere to view high resolution maps of UK constituencies? The sort that will let you know that "the east side of this road is in this constituency and the west side in that one? Everything I've found through google or on Wikipedia is lo res or detail-less. -- SGBailey (talk) 11:19, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Try https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/election-maps/gb/. Select BOUNDARY and Westminster Constituencies. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:24, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thx -- sgb

There's also http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/googleseats2018.html and http://boundaries.spatialanalysis.co.uk/2018/. I'm sure I've seen another one, but I can't find it LongHairedFop (talk) 16:25, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

C. of E. services

This morning I attended mass for Pentecost (Whit Sunday) at the local parish church. The printed service sheet (produced by "The Catholic Printing Company of [location]" included a prayer for "N. our Pope and N. our Bishop and all the clergy". The celebrant rendered this as "Francis our Pope and Jonathan our Bishop and all the clergy" while the order of service also included the "Hail Mary", with the Regina Coeli on a card. Since what is said in church is no longer governed by Act of Parliament, how much control does the Church now have over the clergy? 81.148.187.1 (talk) 13:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure it was a C. of E. service? Blueboar (talk) 13:51, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See paragraph six in Church of England. DOR (HK) (talk) 13:55, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and it doesn't seem relevant. More helpful is our article Bishop of Fulham. 81.148.187.1 (talk) 14:14, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see you're referring to the paragraph immediately above the Table of Contents (in my browser). Yes, that's very helpful. 81.148.187.1 (talk) 14:29, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But are you sure it was a CofE church? Describing Francis as "our Pope" seems a bit extreme even for a parish under a flying bishop. DuncanHill (talk) 15:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extreme yes, but not unknown. Our local Anglo-Catholic church had a portrait of Pope John-Paul II hanging in the vestibule the last time I visited (it was a couple of Popes ago). Those priests attached to the Forward in Faith pressure group seem to be the most zealously Catholic of the lot. I sometimes wonder why they don't go the whole hog and defect to Rome. Alansplodge (talk) 21:58, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Former POTUS political interviews

I saw a John Kerry interview on MSNBC yesterday. That got me thinking: I don't think I've ever seen a former President give political-related interviews like this one. I only ever saw low-ranking former government officials give political interviews, so even a former Secretary of State giving an interview was an eye-opener for me.

Is there some sort of a unspoken rule that former Presidents does not give political commentary/criticize decisions made by the current administration? Scala Cats (talk) 18:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to mention that Al Gore is extremely vocal, especially on environmental issues, but he was only ever Vice President. Scala Cats (talk) 20:24, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is a bit of an unspoken rule for former Presidents not to criticize the current President. There's also an unspoken rule about the current President not criticizing the former Presidents, although their immediate predecessor may be an exception, as every President naturally wants to blame their predecessor for all the mess they are in, even if they themselves have created it. Of course, Trump completely ignores all the traditions and expectations of the Presidency, so we can expect him to continue to do so once he is an ex-President. StuRat (talk) 21:59, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This and This and This and This seem relevant reading for the OP. --Jayron 32 02:58, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is also expected that former Presidents do not interfere in politics in any way. When Clinton was President, Carter went to Israel to try to broker a peace deal. Clinton was rather angry about it and did what he could to get Carter out of the deal. Mainly, Clinton stepped in and took over the peace discussions himself. It culminated in the 2000 peace summit. In my opinion, if you really want to know what it is like to be a former President (and be a President), read Carter's memoir. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 12:42, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As I recall, Harry Truman was not shy about criticizing active politicians, especially Republicans. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:06, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Truman and Eisenhower did go from a friendly relationship to a bitter feud when Eisenhower ran for election in 1952. Eisenhower voiced many attacks on Truman (and Washington in general). Overall, the 1952 election turned Truman into a bit of a curmudgeon. In my opinion, it ruined his legacy. Had he welcomed his loss in the primaries and then welcomed Eisenhower, he would be remembered for creating a strong economy and social balance during a time of uneasiness about the Cold War. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 13:19, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bill and Hillary Clinton of course remain active in politics to this very day. 173.228.123.121 (talk) 07:04, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adolf Hitler and fox hunting

Did Adolf Hitler ever ban fox hunting?50.26.127.149 (talk) 21:36, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He certainly did. See Thanks to Hitler, hunting with hounds is still verboten. The relevant law is Reichsjagdgesetz von 3.7.1934. Alansplodge (talk) 21:47, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]