Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2006 July 16

Humanities Science Mathematics Computing/IT Language Miscellaneous 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 at one of the pages linked to above.

< July 15 Humanities desk archive July 17 >

What is the copyright status of Zorro?

I find copyright for characters somewhat confusing. The creator generally owns the copyright, unless he sells it or created the character for somebody else (like Marvel). Then there are all the associated works by others using the character.

Zorro was created by a guy who died in 1958, and I think copyright in the U.S. is usually author's life plus 50 years, so Zorro should be public domain in a year and a half. Is this correct?

Sony Pictures apparently claimed it has the "exclusive license to develop and distribute all films and television programs based on “Zorro.”" I haven't found anything about the outcome of that case, though. Mr. Billion 00:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

So: Who "owns" Zorro? Is there an official Zorro site? There's this, but I'm not sure how "official" that actually is.

The whole idea is farcical; The Curse of Capistrano was published in 1919, and anything published before 1923 in the U.S. is in the public domain. There are no exceptions to this.--Pharos 00:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Pharos. --Mr. Billion 04:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

• Yeah, but copyrights and trademarks are different; trademarks don't expire. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 17:11, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

For a general treatment of this subject, written for laypersons, see Protection of Fictional Characters (by Lloyd L. Rich). --Mathew5000 15:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

canadian elections

This is an ambitious project: multiple users would be a good idea.

I'd like to compile a history of newspaper endorsements of canadian political parties during election campaigns. There's currently an article for the 2006 election, but no others. It would be fascinating to see which newspapers endorsed whom, and if possible, when and why. Any takers?

You might get some at Wikipedia:WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada. Grutness...wha? 09:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

History of Bankers

I am trying to find any names of bankers from 700BC to 400 AD

Probably all Chinese, but that's just a guess. DirkvdM 08:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

History of banking suggests the earliest banks were the temples of Babylon, Ancient Greece, and Ancient Rome; it doesn't name any individuals. I would have thought any individual setting up as an independent bank in those days would have been asking for trouble. Money would have been stored in a very secure place like the king's vaults or a temple, where the priests would have maintained control of the money.--Shantavira 17:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

History of the garter?

Can anyone tell me the history of the American wedding tradition of tossing the garter? The Wikipedia article doesn't seem to help much. The Jade Knight 03:18, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Yvon Neptune

Is Yvon Neptune still alive? Does anybody know? Melty Rox

[1] would seem to indicate that he is.-gadfium 04:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Supreme Court in Australia

Why is the Supreme Court in Queensland designed as it is and what is the significance of the design and court protocols?(eg the position of the judge, the Crown Prosecutor, Defence Counsel, jury, accused and toher parties to the court proceedings) Any help/Appropriate websites would be of great help. Thankyou--203.134.189.38 03:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)James

Have you read the article Supreme Court of Queensland? --Canley 00:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Abstract Art

What do you call this?: http://www.3dcafe.com/components/com_ponygallery/img_pictures/originals/theclimb.jpg

I've seen art featuring the same idea as this one, but what is the single piece of art that inspired this one? --user:valuefreeperson2

Relativity (M. C. Escher).-gadfium 04:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

YES! Thank you! --user:valuefreeperson2

Common tree in California

I recently visited California, and noticed a particular tree that was planted in San Diego, Santa Monica, and San Francisco. It was commonly planted along the streets in these cities. It had white-ish bark and green leaves. Anyone know what the specific tree is? --Un sogno modesto 06:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

• Birch? AdamBiswanger1 16:51, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Does Rich People care about getting max benefit for their money for small value items?

I worked with and represented wealthy people as a lawyer. I found that old money tends to be extremely frugal. They could not maintain the family wealth if they spent it foolishly. Although they did not have to work, I observed a strong work ethic in law, medicine, etc. It is a choice. I view all people, except for a few new money vulgar types, as not wanting to part with their money. Of course, this is my own observation and not a study. Some sociological study must have been published. 75Janice. 7/26/06 at 6p.m. UTC

Hybrid Benz for 2008 From: Agence France-Presse From correspondents in Berlin

July 16, 2006

THE first hybrid Mercedes car will be launched at the start of 2008, German-US parent company DaimlerChrysler said overnight, in an effort to tap into a growing market as consumers look to cut their fuel bills.

My question is this: Does rich people care about getting value for money even if the amount (for the item) is less than $20 dollars. By rich, I'm refering to the top 10% of the population by income.

Ohanian 06:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

New products are often first sold as novelties. The rich are a good source of money, but they don't care as much about actual advantages as they do about the status it gives them. "Hey, I've got this new thing. A hybrid car! You don't have that yet, do you?" (pittiful look on face). This is a bit exaggerated, but there is often a bit of that in the decision to buy something - the wish to stand out. Especially with a car, the ultimate dick extension status symbol. Though a disadvantage here might be that saving fuel is considered a bit of a left-wing thing, and rich people don't generally want to be associated with that. So my guess is that any commercials at this stage (for the expensive cars) will focus more on the novelty value than the fuel savings. DirkvdM 08:16, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I would say it depends on if they are "new rich" or "old rich". People who started out poor and are now rich got that way largely by careful budgetting, and remain that way when they are rich. An exception might be people who got rich "the easy way", by winning lotteries or lawsuits. Those who inherited their wealth tend not to know the value of money and squander it frivolously. George Bush, Sr., for example, had no idea what a loaf of bread costs, since he was too rich to ever worry about such "trivial matters". An interesting example of this is when a 10% luxury tax was added to things like yachts in the US. The politicians had thought the rich could easily afford it and wouldn't care, but sales of those items plummetted after the tax went into effect, showing many rich people are watching their money carefully. StuRat 11:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I recently read that after some harbour had upped its mooring prices, Bill Gates decided to move his yacht elsewhere. Considering that he has about 100 million times more money than I have that would be like me going through the effort of moving my bike to save 1 thousand's of a cent. The idiot could probably have bought the harbour to solve the problem. DirkvdM 18:54, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

1/1000 is "one-thousandth of a cent". We can't have any supporters of Muslim terrorist using poor grammar, now can we ? :-) StuRat 16:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't believe everything you read - even on Wikipedia. How come incredibly rich people suddenly become "idiots"? Thrift is usually a laudable practice, so how come Gates is expected to be a wastrel just because he wouldn't miss a few billion here or there? Buying a harbour in order to avoid the trouble of moving your yacht - now that would have been idiocy. Simple solutions still work best, no matter how rich you are.  :--) JackofOz 19:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't read it on Wikipedia and I didn't call him an idiot for being rich but for what he did. The simplest solution for him would have been to not bother. What else do you have the money for? The idea of buying the harbour was only meant to illustrate my point. But if Gates moved to make a point, that point would have been sharper if he had indeed bought the harbour. DirkvdM 18:51, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

You forget something important - Bill Gates didn't actually move his yacht himself. He paid someone else to do it. All he did was say "yes, move it", which probably took exactly the same time as saying "no, don't move it". Sure the actual moving took someone some time, and Gates paid him for that, but if the amount paid to move the yacht was less than the increase in fees then it makes sense to move it. DJ Clayworth 22:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

• A very simple answer to the question is "yes, that's how they stay rich." But a lot of people seem to think the opposite. It's true that ridiculously flashy spending gets a lot of attention, but most people in that top 10% (which isn't particularly wealthy, by the way) indeed look for value for money. Why? Because even if you're rich, it feels lousy to be taken advantage of. Keep in mind, though, that "value" itself is somewhat flexible. For instance, what's the value of a piece of fine art? Or a gourmet meal? Sure, an In-n-out cheeseburger probably nourishes the body exactly as well as a dinner at Michael Mina, but the artistic value can't be priced very well. (OK, it can, about $300/head as opposed to $3/head. But you know what I mean.) --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 20:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

A nourishing cheeseburger? Where can you get those? DirkvdM 18:51, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

A real cheeseburger has plenty of nutrients, but also has lots of horrible crap in it, like animal fat, bad cholesterol, etc. However, a healthy and tasty veggie version of a "cheeseburger" can be made, without these disadvantages. StuRat 16:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Here is how a very rich person can come to own your business: He will buy on credit from you until you can't continue to operate unless he pays you what he owes you. He will not pay you what he owes you. You go bankrupt. He buys your business for pennies on the dollar, the debt is wiped out and whatever profits you might have made are now going into his pocket. Rich people don't generally tip, they rarely pick up the tab, they'll haunt you as a house guest rather than stay at a hotel, they will borrow a car or hitch a ride rather than take a taxi. A dollar here, a dollar there--it adds up. And, to be fair, probably they were never tipped or intruded upon, so they really don't understand how difficult they make it for other people. Why do people allow themselves to be imposed upon by the very rich? Because they think someday they will get some of the money. They are living in a dream world. Read Great Expectations for an enjoyable course on what sorts of people are generous and what sorts are not. --Gabbyhayes 04:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Any businessperson who lends so much money to one person (that their business depends on them paying up) is an idiot. The person with the debt could always be sued for the amount owed, as well. And all rich people aren't the same anymore than all middle-class people are the same. StuRat 15:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Nasrallah's Investments

Why hasn't the Lebanese government seized Hasan Nasrallah's bank account. If Nasrallah weren't so loaded those youths wouldn't have money to march back and forth with ammunition attached to their chests and arms. They're on Nasrallah's payroll."--Patchouli 08:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Hezbollah is getting a lot of money from Iraan, and I bet little of it comes through conventional banking channels. In any case, Hezbollah is now part of the Lebanese government. AnonMoos 18:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

From my understanding, the Lebanese government hasn't lifted a finger against Hezbollah, which raises the question of whether it's really such an imperative to distinguish between the two in military action. You could make an SAT analogy question -- Hezbollah:Lebanon :: Al-Qaeda:Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. Of course, Israel isn't about to occupy the entirety of Afghanistan and try to install a friendly government like the U.S. is doing in Afghanistan. On the other hand, perhaps the international community and/or Israel's offensive might be able to persuade the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah and actually exercise authority on the entirety of its own country. The question is whether the Lebanese government is strong enough to do that, and whether it could even do that without launching a Shia vs. Sunnis/Christians (or three-way) civil war. -- Mwalcoff 00:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hezbollah is, in fact, part of the Lebanese government. They just had elections and members of Hezbollah did very well, picking up several seats. --Gabbyhayes 04:03, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Hezbollah is not a separate group which terrorises Lebanese. It's popularity (within all religions) can be explained by the fact that it never harmed or raised a weapon againt a Lebanese and because of it large campaign a charitable actions, in addition to building hospitals and shelters which the governmnet didn't do. Therefore, you cannot compare it to Al-Qaeda or Taliban which aimed at terrorising their population (including Mulsims and Arabs). That's why every decision about its disarmament must meet population agreement and consensus. Lebanon is a democratic country after all. CG 18:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Book shown in Napoleon Dynamite

In the film Napoleon Dynamite, there is a book briefly show that has some odd title which I believe is related to cryptozoology. The book is never directly discussed. My vague memory is that it's an entitled "Bigfoot and Me"-- but a google doesn't find enough hits for that to be exactly. What is the title of the book? --Alecmconroy 09:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Calendar system

Which calender celebrates/counts 11,22,33,44... years anniversary? I have heard of this some time ago, but can´t remember the calendars name.

Would be greatful for an answer.

--Tls99lli 10:39, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Undecennial is the term for something occuring at 11 year intervels and undecimal is the term for counting by 11s, but neither one in conjunction with calendar in a search brings anything up. So... I'm a bit stumped. Maybe those terms will at least help you in searching :) Digfarenough 16:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The sun is on an 11-year sunspot cycle. Most other calendar cycles are 12-year and 19-year (Metonic cycle). -LambaJan 16:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Damnatio memoriae- Hatshepsut

Hi. I've been looking for images of evidence of Damnatio Memoriae of Hatshepsut, but can't find any. If anyone could help me out in finding some images of the erasure and destruction of her name, image or monuments: please let me know..

THANKS!

gelo 12:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Aircraft Identification

Could anyone identify this aircraft, ie, Manufcaturer and Model: http://www.studioeleven.info/library/image/waddington_2006/IMG_7452.JPG

Thanks,

--86.137.228.26 12:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't without a better photo. It looks like some experimental kit plane but I can't be sure. Dismas|^(talk) 10:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Title of second of Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes novels

Is the correct title of the second of Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes novels The Sign of Four OR The Sign of the Four, with an additional definite article? I have seen both titles used for editions of the book. Why has this title confusion happened? Did the second published edition have a different title than the first published edition? I know for a fact that within the text itself, the phrase used is "the sign of the four". My conjecture is that the original book title omitted the additional definite article, which contradicted the text itself, resulting in this confusion. Does anyone authoritatively know the history of this book's published editions' titles? —Lowellian (reply) 14:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

And a related question: which title is correct, The Casebook of Sherlock Holmes OR The Case Book of Sherlock Holmes? Again, I have seen published editions with either title. —Lowellian (reply) 15:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The Sign of Four is the first title in the Bodleian catalogue (1890, 1893); the Sign of the Four doesn't seem to show up until a 1937 US play adaptation. Case book first appears 1927, and Casebook 1986. If you'd like, I can request their copy of A bibliography of A. Conan Doyle (ISBN 0198181906 if you want to check a library) and check - it'll probably be authoritative - or request the books themselves and check the title pages... if so, leave a talk-page note for me and I'll check them tomorrow or Wednesday. Shimgray | talk | 15:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Note: This question has been followed up on Talk:Sherlock Holmes. Any Wikipedians interested in further discussion should continue there. —Lowellian (reply) 05:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

How best to (realistically) become a millionaire?

I heard a radio show on NPR today that discussed this very subject. The guest stated that brownbagging, bulk buying, saving a small sum of your paycheck are chosen because they are easy solutions compared to selling you house because it is too expensive. In other words, the small, incremental changes often recommended will never amount to a retirement fund. Drastic and painful changing of your life style and massive saving is required. 75Janice 7/26/06 6pm UTC Some people do become millionaires from nothing, so it's not impossible.

Ways I can think of are:

1) Purchase rental properties. As over time the rents and the price of the property hopefully increase, use this to get mortgages to buy more property. Keep going.

2) Do a flotation on the London AIM stock market, or similar junoir stock market in your part of the world.

I am excluding non-serious methods eg.:

Rob a bank - unethical and very risky

Become a drugs baron - see above

Buy a winning lottery ticket - extremely extremely unlikely

Invent something - nearly all new products fail and loose money

Start with two million and become a gambler - jokey

Marry someone rich - I want to marry for love only.

Invest £X a month in the stock market - too slow, I could be dead before I made my £1M, when in any case it would be eaten away by inflation and not be worth much.

And I do mean £1M in british pounds or their equivalent in value - not 1M turkish lira for example.

Has anyone - perhaps a real living millionaire - got any other realistic suggestions?

If you must know, I've got an MBA, I'm currently worth over £200000 net, and I'd prefer to make £1M within say around 5 years.

I'd say the most realistic way is to just live below your means and save your money. Buy generic products instead of brand names, use energy efficient products, use public transportation/bike/walk instead of driving, cook your own food instead of eating at restaurants, etc.: lots of easy ways to cut down on expenses and let your savings grow. Why so anxious to make £1M anyhow? If you aren't happy with what you have now, you won't be happy with that, I figure. Digfarenough 16:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I do all that already! Been doing it all my life. Howdya think I got the £200K (about $400000). And who says I'm not happy. Its just I'd like my own large country mansion. But in any case, I dont think merely saving money is enough to accumulate £1M in real terms.

You left off "encourage your relatives to do one of the above and then inherit it". ;-) --Fastfission 18:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Take me out of Brazil and give me some fundings, and I'll make us both millionaires in three years. That, or you get your money back with compensations. :P I'm serious, though. ☢ Ҡi∊ff⌇↯ 19:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Become a venture capitalist; a wisely $70,000 invested in the Digital Equipment Corporation made back millions of dollars in the 60s. Just make sure you do not do what they did in the dot com boom time, and sink all your cash into a business with no way of taking revenue, or a break even point in the millions. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 20:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

There is no specific way, the only way is to acquire something of value of of a million pounds and sell it. Wether you made it, or purchased it at a lower price or whatever. Philc _T^E_C^I 00:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Start a cult and skim money from it. Crazywolf 01:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

A common "American Dream" method is to find something that costs you almost nothing to make but people are willing to purchase at a nominal price - ie: disposable razors, wire hangers, shoelaces... Then, sell a few million of them. That is the basis of most rags-to-riches stories in the United States. --Kainaw ^(talk) 15:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

The "purchase rental properties" method is risky. In recent years, in the UK, average rent increases have not kept pace with increases in house prices. Though you will still make money when your property is occupied, you have to expect it to be empty for (on average) a month each year. Factor in the cost of finding new tenants; the fact that you'll pay a higher mortgage rate for buy-to-let; the cost of repairs, gas safety certificates, cleaning up after departing tenants who've trashed the place; the risk that property prices don't rise as fast as you're expecting. All in all, it's far from a safe bet. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 11:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more, Open. And in fact I am losing money every month my property is occupied, because I had to drop the rent to attract tenants so my mortgage is not being covered. It's a mug's game. --Richardrj 12:06, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Some guy did it by selling a million pixels on his homepage to anyone who wanted them..... Skittle 12:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Exploit malnourished children in South East Asia. Pckeffer

Try this site, if you want to become a millionaire. But be persistent. http://www.subconscious-secrets.com/ It shows you how to get there.

Why are we asking how to get rich quick in Wikipedia? Bibliomaniac15 23:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

drinking law

am i already allowed to drink alcohol the day of my 21st birthday?? i just wanna make sure so i won't get in trouble .. thanks!

Dunno. You haven't told us where you're located. --ColourBurst 16:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Though I'm a law student - indeed, especially because I'm law student - I cannot give legal advice. You should consult a lawyer if you want an authoritative answer. That said, as far as I know in every US state you can drink on the day of your 21st. Indeed, I've been in bars in several states that offer specials to those who come in on the day of their 21st. So you're probably safe. --George 20:11, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't remember where (probably Texas given its track record), but I saw a news item recently that a jurisdiction wants to make drinking on your 21st birthday illegal due to the customary overdrinking. These morons obviously don't realize that people can just shift their binge to the next day legally. --Nelson Ricardo 20:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The binge drinking on the birthday has resulted in some highly publicized deaths. What I think is more common is for states and municipalities to try to outlaw the birthday specials George mentioned. However, in Louisiana, they still have drive-through daquiri stands. Geogre 00:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

If you are in almost any country other than the United States, you can drink legally the day before your 21st birthday. -- Mwalcoff 00:09, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

In Australia, you can legally drink for 1,095 days (or 1,096 days if a leap year is involved) before your 21st birthday. That may or may not be a good thing. JackofOz 02:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Ahh the USA, land of the free, home of the brave. You can get your Driver's license at 16. You can join the United States Marine Corps at 17, to recieve full military training. You can legally buy a firearm at 18 (in most states). You can vote at 18, and thereby use all your legal political power. You can legaly have sex with 18, and thereby you are legaly able to create a new human being (baby). And you can drink alcoholic beverages with 21, being able to get completly drunk. Ok, it largly depends on the state you are living in, but still all these patterns are the average standarts of the USA. Certainly, it is the most logical country of the world. Flamarande 09:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

It should be noted that in many states in the USA, there's no such thing as a "legal drinking age", so to speak. Rather, people must be a certain age to buy alcohol or consume it in certain public places, but if Ma & Pa want to buy little Junior some beer for home consumption, that's legal in some and perhaps most states, I do believe. Personally I think we should lower the "drinking age" but raise the driving age. When kids get killed around here, it's because of poor driving, not over-drinking. Give 'em a six pack and let 'em walk. --Kevin

Flamarande, in the U.S. you can legally have sex and procreate at any age. What is illegal is for an adult to have sex with a minor. --Nelson Ricardo 15:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Not so fast, Mr. Ricardo. The Age of consent varies wildly from state to state. For example, in Kansas, if a pair of 14 year olds have consentual sex, they have both committed statutory rape against the other, and are both de facto sex offenders...now I don't think that this has ever been prosecuted, but it's possible. Also, under federal law, if two minors, ie under 18, film themselves having sex, and send the film to each other, they could be charged and prosecuted as child pornographers! Isn't law fun? Brian Schlosser42 20:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I half agree with you. Certainly raise the driving age. It's a very rare 17 who's anywhere near mature enough to fully appreciate the responsibility thay have to drive safely. I'd require much, much harder driving tests, and licences that have to be renewed annually, with a tough test each time. Young drivers, by the very nature of youth, flout just about every law in the book, and their bad behaviours become internalised all too easily. JackofOz 10:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

One of AP Herbert's "Misleading Cases" was about a bizzare case where someone died at sea, crossing the date line, and coinciding with the maturity of their heir - what day did either of these things happen on? It's fictional, but there is a well-reasoned note at the end which states that, according to the common law (quoting Halsbury) -

Full age is attained at the close of the day preceding the twenty-first anniversary of birth...

Assuming your state subscribes to the sensible common-law doctrine, you're fine. (Halsbury contends this means you actually become 21 the beginning of the day before, through an odd doctrine of parts-of-days, but I suspect legislation has now got around this) Shimgray | talk | 15:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

"You can legaly have sex with 18...". Probably, but I wouldn't recommend it. And you can't marry them all. DJ Clayworth 18:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

The question was about drinking, not buying a drink. Surely it's not illegal to consume alcohol in America before a certain age? It'd infringe on many religious practices, not to mention ruining many a recipe. --Dweller 15:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Buying alcohol for a minor is a specific crime in several states though, so if you are over the legal age, but buy alcohol for someone under, you can still get in trouble --WhiteDragon 13:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

the only reason theres a drinking age [21] is that by then youre almost grown. when alcohol enters your body system, it goes into your blood stream, your liver, and your brain& your heart. if you have a smaller body or a premature body it can hit you quicker and effect your body growth and brain development.thats why the gov't picked 21. your body is about stopped growing and so has your mind hehe. in other countries there is a limit by lightly enforced.

Ralph Nader

Is he running in 2008?

He won't have much impact if he does. Karl Marx once said something about repeated patterns of similar historical events turning from tragedy to farce... AnonMoos 17:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

He certainly had an impact in 2000! Hopefully he'll run again in '08! I hereby endorse Ralph Nader for president in 2008. Go Ralph Go! Loomis 19:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

This doesn't have much to say on the subject. But then, it wouldn't, would it, because Wikipedia is not a crystal ball.  :--) JackofOz 04:07, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I doubt it. He didn't gain much publicity last time and he's getting older. On the other hand, in 2008 there probably won't be a super-offensive Republican to unite the opposition, like Bush in 2004. And if Clinton is nominated, I can imagine a lot of Democrats voting for someone else. Bhumiya (said/done) 16:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't expect reason from Ralph, he knew he totally screwed things for Gore in 2000. (Honestly, Nader was to Gore what Bill Buckner was to the '86 Red Sox. He's the guy that screwed up what would otherwise be a sure win. Not that I'm complaining!) I hope you're right, and that Hillary won't win. In any case, despite my above "endorsement" of Ralph, my serious all out favourite would be Rudolph Giuliani. He's got to be, definitely, by far, the best guy for the job. Failing him, I'd go for Condaleeza. She's extremely bright and knows her stuff. Failing her I'd have to go for McCain. Yes, he's a bit wacky, but I still like him. Well better than Hillary at least. Loomis 23:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Name of a music

I'm looking for a popular 80's (I believe) electornic song I've seen in several places. It starts with an overdrive guitar like this (midi file)

Anyone can help me? Thanks! -- Anon

Last American slave?

When did the last black American born into slavery die? --80.176.147.202 19:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, Google answers lists "Charlie Smith, who died on October 5, 1979 in Barstow, Florida at age 137 years old, was reputed to be the last American slave, having been born in West Africa."; however, no one has ever verifiable lived that long. The 1960s or 1970s is probably the right timeframe for this to have occurred.

The last known living children of slaves are still alive today.[2] Rmhermen 19:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

science fiction story

I am searching for a science fiction short story with this plot: a miles-long lizard lands on the earth...it is worshiped as God.... it shifts position and causes mucho destruction...thanx...

Perhaps Bokrug from H.P. Lovecraft's short story "The Doom That Came to Sarnath"? --Canley 00:17, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you might be confusing things a bit. On Douglas Adams' book So Long and Thanks for All the Fish, Ford Prefect lands on Earth in a giant spaceship made by lizard people. The ship just stays still and causes lots of damage when landing. It seems very reasonable. ☢ Ҡi∊ff⌇↯ 00:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I remember that story, but I can't tell you the title or author. Your summary matches my recollection, except that I thought the object landing on Earth was some piece of interstellar flotsam, probably not alive. The story might have ended with the words "Suck air".-gadfium 06:43, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I think this was Heresies of the Huge God by Brian W Aldiss though I cannot find my copy of his "Moment of Eclipse" collection to check. Notinasnaid 10:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Dune has some big old wormy things in it, they are involved in some rituals, but it's not based on earth. Philc _T^E_C^I 16:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

The phrase "suck air" is the closing phrase from an early sci-fi short story called The Liberation of Earth, whose author I can't remember but is occasionally anthologised. No giant lizards are involved, but the basic plot involves Earth being militarily 'liberated' from under the dominion of one alien species by another alien species over and over, until eventually the human are reduced to running through the shattered remnants of the Earth looking for increasingly scarce water and re-telling the story of their liberation. As my copy puts it "The astonishing thing about this story is that it was written before anyone had even heard of Vietnam". DJ Clayworth 18:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

My mistake, I confused the two stories. Yes, Heresies of the Huge God by Brian W Aldiss is what the original poster was after. William Tenn wrote The Liberation of Earth, which contained the exhortation I recalled.-gadfium 23:30, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Which mummies?

I seem to recall a ship that set out from Spain (maybe), having stored their food in cans with led in them. Eating food containing small amounts of led, slowly made them insane, reportedly, and the legend has it, they started unloading desks and whatnot onto the shores of Greenland. Insane and cold, they were naturally mumified.

What were these famous mummies called? I've searched google to no avail. They're not listed in the Mummies section.

Thanks!

Sounds like the Franklin expedition in much of the details. Bunthorne 01:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1550546163/002-1766549-0747217?v=glance&n=283155 This book is called "Frozen IN Time" and tells all about it.hotclaws**==(81.134.77.56 04:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC))