Humanities desk
< July 22	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 24 >

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

July 23

What are the names of the two strongly blue German districts in the middle of the Russian Empire in 1897?

What are the names of the two strongly blue German districts in the middle of the Russian Empire (on or near the Volga River) in 1897--on the map on the right? Futurist110 (talk) 06:52, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kamyshinsky Uyezd in the west and Novouzensky Uyezd in the east. StellarHalo (talk) 07:20, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! So, they were close to being German-plurality in 1897, but weren't quite there. Futurist110 (talk) 19:50, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Was George Floyd a landlord?

So, according to George Floyd's info on Wikidata along with other sources, George Floyd was also known as "Floyd the Landlord". Was he actually a landlord or landowner, owning multiple houses and renting some of them out? StellarHalo (talk) 07:03, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A quick Google Search easily confirms that the name comes from a role he played in some very low-budget adult films. "Floyd the Landlord" is a character he played acting in at least one adult film. He was not a landlord, but he played one on TV. --Jayron 32 15:17, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is the difference between Number of Orders, Number of Receipts and payments and General Ledger?

I wasn't sure if it is best to publish this in RD:Humanities/Math;

Before I start to do bookkeeping maximally myself, I try to learn on some fundamental accounting terminology; I have become confused about the following terms:

Number of Orders (ספר הזמנות)
Number of Receipts and payments (ספר תקבולים ותשלומים)
General Ledger (ספר חשבונות)

If one describes orders made to its accounting entity in a Number of orders and if one describes receipts given from its accounting entity in a Number of receipts and payments than I personally misunderstand why a general ledger is needed.
I would theorize that a general ledger includes documentation of these and other documents (such as invoices) but I might be wrong.

What is the difference between Number of Orders, Number of Receipts and payments and General Ledger? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.230.96.79 (talk) 07:11, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just going off my experience in retail for a large company and having shopped in a lot of small businesses (and not knowing the meaning or any nuance I'm missing from the Hebrew):

An order is a request for goods or services to be exchanged for currency. A receipt is a note that payment for the order occurred. Ideally, these should have a one-to-one ratio but there will be times where they won't line up. For example, if an order was made, recorded, and then cancelled without payment (perhaps due to lack of payment), the number of orders would exceed the number of receipts. In certain businesses (say, a distributor selling goods directly from unrelated companies in exchange for an overhead), a customer might also make (what is to them) a single order for many goods and the business might process it as multiple orders but still only charge the customer one time for all items (resulting in many orders and one receipt). A customer might even place multiple orders at the same time only for the business to process them as a complex transaction, resulting in one order with many receipts. Even in a business where orders and receipts would have a one-to-one ratio, there could still be a gap in time between the two: for barbershops and some restaurants, asking for payment before receiving the service is generally taken as a sign that the business is scared of (justifiable) refunds due to bad service. (Fast-food gets by on the assumption that they're putting out a mechanized product rather than rendering a culinary service). Computerized point-of-sale systems can make the gap between order and receipt even smaller (sometimes impossible to perceive), perhaps refusing to acknowledge that an order has occurred until it also registers a receipt.

A modern ledger should (at a minimum) keep track of how much money is going in and coming out, which are not the same as orders and receipts (even if they might ideally have a one-to-one ratio and even if more complete ledgers would also track those). A customer buying something for $20 might pay with a $15 gift card and a $10 bill, resulting in a $15 credit from the card, a $10 credit from the bill, and a $5 debit for the customer's change (and let's just ignore the initial cost to the business of whatever it was the customer was buying, paying for store upkeep, employees...). Combine that with the earlier example where a business breaks a customer's single order into multiple orders (say, two $7 orders and two $3 orders just to make the question of what money goes where even messier), and it becomes pretty obvious why almost any businesses that bothers with any accounting beyond "end the day with more cash than we started with" uses computerized point-of-sale and accounting systems. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:47, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your answer was very helpful for me Ian; I found it very didactic and now the differences between these three "accounting books" are much clearer for me. Thank you. 49.230.96.79 (talk) 09:00, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, while I'm sure Ian understood your intentions, "didactic" is not usually complimentary. It has undertones of being patronizing and/or regimented to an excessive degree. A better choice might have been "educational" (and I agree it was a good answer). Matt Deres (talk) 19:03, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ian, I have reread your answer; I was sure I understood it enough, but I misunderstand the critical following:

A customer buying something for $20 might pay with a $15 gift card and a $10 bill, resulting in a $15 credit from the card, a $10 credit from the bill, and a $5 debit for the customer's change (and let's just ignore the initial cost to the business of whatever it was the customer was buying, paying for store upkeep, employees...). Combine that with the earlier example where a business breaks a customer's single order into multiple orders (say, two $7 orders and two $3 orders just to make the question of what money goes where even messier), and it becomes pretty obvious why almost any businesses that bothers with any accounting beyond "end the day with more cash than we started with" uses computerized point-of-sale and accounting systems.
— User:Ian.thomson

About "Combine that"; currently I don't know how to do that combination; how would you do it?... 49.230.11.175 (talk) 13:25, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

182.232.198.247 (talk) 10:13, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ian.thomson, in great plea share your reply just to that one point. 49.230.3.204 (talk) 15:55, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is put that example together with the other one. In other words, imagine a situation where a customer buys makes one order worth $20, the business breaks it into two $7 orders and two $3 orders (because they have to get the goods from four different companies), and the customer pays with a $15 gift card and a $10 bill. The situation is deliberately a mess that I would never try to solve the math on without a computer. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:48, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to fathom where counts of paper documents would or could be kept in the accounting system. The general ledger is normally about dollars (or whatever unit of currency). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:12, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ian; I think I understand the combination now: A state of "breaking a purchase into sub purchases" combined with a state of "a mess of payment ways" could be handled much easier with a ledger --- let along a computerized point-of-sale-recording ledger, as the money movements would be most efficiently recorded and traceable if needed. 49.230.3.204 (talk) 03:07, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

US Code titles known as "acts"

Titles 13 and 17 of the United States Code are referred to in many sources (not least Department of Commerce v. New York and Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc. respectively) as the "Census Act" and the "Copyright Act" respectively despite being titles of the US Code that have been enacted into positive law (so the terminology is not technically incorrect). Are there any other titles that are referred to as "acts"?—azuki (talk · contribs · email) 08:12, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Laws by the Congress are often called the whatever-Act. The Affordable Care Act, for one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:42, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All text is the U.S.C. were acts of Congress before their enumeration in the Code. The code is a sort of indexing system (basically a database) of the general and permanent laws passed by Congress. It is not itself U.S. law, but it is a convenient way to reference laws. When the courts cite a part of the code, it is done to allow others to find the relevant text for reference purposes, but the act of Congress that put that text there is still the actual relevant law. The two ways to refer to a law (by an act name and by a relevant code reference) are not mutually exclusive, and there's nothing wrong with using one, the other, or both. In this case, the Census Act referred to by the Court is NOT the merely Title 13 of the United States Code dealing with the census, instead The Census Act is a reference to Public Law 740 which is the law that put the text into that part of the Code. Again, the Title is not being referred to as "an Act". The Title is how one finds the relevant text of the Act, the Act itself was an honest-to-god bill passed by Congress in 1954 called "The Census Act". --Jayron 32 15:11, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Would this help? Table of Popular Names in the US Code (It’s an external link from United_States_Code, which helpfully links to all the titles that are law, but unhelpfully, Wikipedia doesn’t always say if there is a popular name when you look at the individual title articles.) 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

source for Ben Franklin's Jackass

On 2020-07-04 I asked a question on wikiquote:Talk:Benjamin Franklin about wikiquote:Talk:Benjamin Franklin:Franklin's Jackass?

A review of [https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q96943486 Michael Waldman (2016) The Fight To Vote includes the following attributed to Ben Franklin:

"Today a man owns a jackass worth fifty dollars and he is entitled to vote; but before the next election the jackass dies. The man in the meantime has become more experienced, his knowledge of the principles of government, and his acquaintance with mankind, are more extensive, and he is therefore better qualified to make a proper selection of rulers -- but the jackass is dead and the man cannot vote. Now gentlemen, pray inform me, in whom is the right of suffrage? In the man or in the jackass?"

If this is accurate, I think it belongs in the Wikiquote article on "Benjamin Franklin". Sadly, I don't have easy access to this book.

What do you think? Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 15:06, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can preview Waldman’s book online [1]; the footnote for the anecdote says it is from The Casket, or Flowers of Literature, Wit and Sentiment (1828), quoted in Keyssar, The Right to Vote, 3.

(Keyssar refers to Alexander Keyssar, The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States, rev. ed. (New York: Basic Books, 2009). Here is the quote in its preview: [2])

The Casket 1828 is here: [3]. None of my keyword searches are bringing up this quote within it, though. Can anyone else spot it? 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:18, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) If you're trying to get the direct text of a book you don't have access too, you might try WP:REX to see if someone who frequents that noticeboard can help. --Jayron 32 15:20, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have Alexander Keyssar (2000). The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States. Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-02969-8. Wikidata Q97621556., and I found the quote on p. 3. This book by Keyssar is ~500 pages, including 60 pages of notes. I assume that should be good enough for Wikiquote. If not, I can try WP:REX, as you suggest. DavidMCEddy (talk) 16:11, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! It just worries me that the quote doesn’t seem to be where Keyssar says it is. Took a quick look through google scholar for people using the quote with a non-Keyssar attribution and saw another book mentioning the quote (The Franchise and Politics in British North America 1755-1867 by John Garner) [4] and this one attributes it to the Colonial Advocate Dec 27, 1827. That brings up [5] where you indeed find the quote in the middle of the front page. So Garner might be a more reliable source for you. Haven’t had any luck finding the original from Franklin’s lifetime, which would be best of all. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:14, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have Alexander Keyssar (2000). The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States. Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-02969-8. Wikidata Q97621556.. It's an epigraph preface to ch. 1 on his (unnumbered) p. 3.

On the other hand, I so far have been unable to see it in the the middle of the front page of Colonial Advocate Dec 27, 1827, where you say you saw it.

The Garner version is shorter than Keyssar's, leaving out the comment that, "The man in the meantime has become more experience ... ."

I'm inclined to put it in Benjamin Franklin#Attributed, cite Alexander Keyssar (2000). The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States. Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-02969-8. Wikidata Q97621556., p. 3, and leave it at that, especially since we've found it in two different places. The shorter is from 1827 but includes "...", while the longer version is from 1828 and plausibly includes the part indicated in the 1827 version by "...". Since Franklin died in 1790, both could have been quoting some earlier source that misattributed the quote to Franklin. DavidMCEddy (talk) 18:12, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That all seems fair. I promise it's there in the Advocate - zoom in to the middle of the third column, under "warning to drunkards" :) 70.67.193.176 (talk) 20:58, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

None of these attributions identifies when or where Franklin is supposed to have said this. Was it an overheard conversation at the barbershop? It is tempting to provide an anonymous witticism with legitimacy by attributing it to Franklin/Twain/Shaw/Berra/Einstein/.... --Lambiam 08:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pokrowski University

Hi Folks. Anybody know what Pokrowski University is, or even if that is correct name. Based in the Soviet Union and referenced in the Leopold Trepper articles. I don't have a scoobie do what it is. I must search for about 8 times over the last three months and every time I come up blunt. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 21:23, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps an informal name for the Institute of Red Professors, of which M. N. Pokrovsky was the first rector. --Lambiam 22:13, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see a mention of "Pokrowski University" from a quick look through the documents used for the reference. They do mention Kums University and "Intelligence training schools". DuncanHill (talk) 22:31, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lambiam:. Thanks. @DuncanHill: I'll check it. scope_creep^Talk 00:53, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The ref seems correct. I think that is right university. scope_creep^Talk 00:56, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope sreep:Which page of the two pdfs from the National Archives mentions it? Certainly not page 52 as the reference claims. DuncanHill (talk) 01:01, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks folks. Quick result. scope_creep^Talk 01:02, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is not mentioned on page 52 of either of the two pdfs from National Archives as used in the ref. DuncanHill (talk) 01:03, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maps: Who creates and oversees "official" maps?

Oftentimes, on Wikipedia -- and elsewhere -- we see "old maps" (countries with borders different than today; countries that no longer exist; new countries; etc.) In fact, there is one (above) on this Reference Help Desk. (This question, above: What are the names of the two strongly blue German districts in the middle of the Russian Empire in 1897?) This got me to thinking. So, the map "changes" all the time. Is there some official body that is "in charge" and keeps a current illustration of the ever-changing map? Who is "in charge" / responsible for this type of thing? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:39, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikimedia Commons it's handled mainly by adding categories such as Category:Maps needing South Sudan political boundaries to image description pages... AnonMoos (talk) 21:50, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another Wikipedia option, if you notice a map that is wrong/outdated, is that you can request an update to be drawn at Commons:Graphic_Lab/Map_workshop as long as you provide accurate sourcing for the changes. They did one for me last year. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 21:52, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking there's no official body that says what the correct map is. Virtually everything's ad hoc and by local consensus and, where illustration updates are needed, one of the methods mentioned above are an option. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps. 199.66.69.67 (talk) 00:17, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My question was not at all geared to Wikipedia. I meant, "out in the real world". Who oversees this sort of thing? Does the USA, for example, have some "official" map and/or "official" mapmaker? Of the country? Of the world? Etc. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't heard of that sort of authority existing in democratic countries. There are authorities like the United States Geological Survey and the British Ordnance Survey that generally produce the detailed maps that try to show cover the whole country and provide the best information, but nobody would say that a mapping feature on a Rand McNally or A-Z or Google Maps map must be wrong just because the place appeared differently on a USGS or OS map.

Authoritarian governments might take the point of view that everything they publish is definitively correct and any conflicting information is wrong, though. --174.89.49.204 (talk) 04:59, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no official designation of countries' borders. When a body like the UN publishes a map, they are always careful to include a disclaimer stating that "the designations employed and the presentation of the material on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries". --Viennese Waltz 07:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

International borders are usually determined by bilateral treaties or mutual consent between the two nations who share the border. The authority in that case is the two nations that share the mutual border. Subnational borders are determined by the internal political processes of the nation in question, and the authority that nation itself. Wikipedia has some articles for you to use as starting points for your research. You can find them at border and Boundary delimitation and perhaps even Territorial dispute for when things break down. --Jayron 32 11:04, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The official map of Portugal included the town of Olivença, which is still occupied by Spain although it was ordered to hand it back in 1815. (It probably still does). The Estado da Índia was still marked on official maps of Portugal long after it was annexed by the Indian army in 1961. That was the grouse of the people - these places were officially described as ultramar when they were in fact colónias. How to portray disputed/undefined borders is a perennial headache for cartographers. 77.101.226.208 (talk) 13:24, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. So, somewhere -- is not there some "official map" of the USA? Detailing all the states, state borders, cities, national borders, etc.? I assume there must be something, somewhere. Who oversees all that? Who is in charge of all that? When there are issues / questions / concerns ... I doubt that the President or the Governors or the Mayors just say "let's open up some random atlas and see what's there". No? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:12, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not any single "map", like behind glass somewhere. There are various legal documents that define state borders, often the acts of Congress that delimits the state when it was admitted to the union. In the cases of disputes, these legal documents are used by the courts to determine things like jurisdictions and the like. The most recent example of such an event is the North Carolina/South Carolina Border Commission, which made some adjustments to the border in 2013 to make it more accurately align to the enacting legislation that created it originally (i.e. the defined lines in the laws did not match the lines as drawn in the dirt). These sorts of things are generally left up to the states and such to adjudicate themselves, though the courts do get involved when there are disputes that cannot be resolved among the parties. An example of such a dispute which is still ongoing is the Tennessee-Georgia water dispute. Insofar as there is any sort of Federal Government-level maps in the U.S., they would be maintained by the United States Geologic Survey, however these are physical maps and not political maps. They do have political boundaries on them, but they are not legal documents, and the purpose is to create accurate and reliable physical maps of U.S. lands. --Jayron 32 16:46, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For an example of what can be done see cadastral divisions of Western Australia. 2A00:23C1:E101:D700:34A6:251C:F895:A8E8 (talk) 11:36, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the United Kingdom, the mapping authority is the Ordnance Survey, which was founded in 1747.

Linked to that article is National mapping agency. Alansplodge (talk) 13:18, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To add the perspective of a cartographer working for the U.S. government . . . you'd think there is an "official map", but there really isn't. Broadly speaking USGS has mapping authority over the U.S., but if you're looking for a boundary definitions you'll have better luck going to the U.S. Census Bureau which maintains boundaries originally digitized from USGS maps, but updated over the years. But different Federal agencies sometimes use different boundaries, for example both the Census and the Bureau of Indian Affairs have tribal boundaries data, but they do not agree with each other. In the U.S. it's further complicated as the states also maintain their own data, and that's usually at a more detailed level than any of the Federal sources, so if you need an actual property boundary for instance, you generally won't find it at either USGS or the Census, but need to go to the relevant state's mapping agency. Kmusser (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:15, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]