This page uses content from Wikipedia and is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities


The Wikipedia Reference Desk covering the topic of humanities.

Welcome to the humanities reference desk.
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

  • Provide a short header that gives the general topic of the question.
  • Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Post your question to only one desk.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. All answers will be provided here.
  • Specific questions, that are likely to produce reliable sources, will tend to get clearer answers.
  • Note:
    • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
    • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
    • We don't do your homework for you, though we’ll help you past the stuck point.
    • We are not a substitute for actually doing any original research required, or as a free source of ideas.



How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

  • The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
 
Choose a topic:
 
See also:
Help desk
Village pump
Help manual


May 17

Nettle liquid manure

What is nettle liquid manure, and why would France prohibit it? I'd never heard of it before running across the relevant portion of Prohibitionism#Examples. Judging by [1], it's just composted nettles, but it doesn't seem reasonable to prohibit the composting of a native plant (unless they tried some sort of War on Drugs on them?), so I'm wondering if this is a translation error or if the same term has two separate meanings. Nyttend (talk) 02:17, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

I would have guessed that "manure" was a translation error for "fertilizer" if there hadn't been an article linked using the term. But no.
The Prohibitionism article links to this French government page where the prohibition was repealed. It identifies the substance, or rather family of substances, in question as "purins d'orties". The interwiki link to the French Wikipedia from Urtica, i.e. nettles, tells you that that's what orties are. As to the other word, I found it in a 1943 French-English dictionary that I have (Bellows' French Dictionary) with the translation of "liquid manure". It then occurred to me to look up purin in the French Wikipedia, and sure enough, it the word's primary meaning is un déchet liquide produit par les élevages d'animaux domestiques—liquid waste from farm animals. Hence, liquid manure.
But "purin d'orties" has its own section in the article, where it is explained that a better name for the stuff would be extrait fermenté d'orties, i.e. fermented nettle extract.
As to the reason for the prohibition, both that section and the French law mention it: the stuff was considered a produit phytopharmaceutique or "phytopharmaceutical product". In English that means a drug derived from plants, but the French phrase also has an article in the French Wikipedia, which specifically refers to it as a form of pesticide. And that's something that governments would want to regulate. --76.69.47.55 (talk) 06:32, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
"Manure" can mean "fertilizer". See green manure. Also there's the famous quote from Thomas Jefferson: The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure. --Trovatore (talk) 07:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Based on the the rest of the French Wikipedia article, as well as the article on stinging nettles, it seems that the 2006 law was against unregulated pesticides/fertilizers, and it only accidentally prohibited nettle manure, based on the way it's made and not on the actual composition. That law was amended almost immediately, and then the prohibition on nettle manure was removed entirely in 2011. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:18, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

1983~1990 Palau National Geographic article question

Folks, I'm sorry, I live in Japan and have no access to an English-language lending library. In the 1980s, National Geographic Magazine published an article on the then-new nation of Palau including (my paraphrase) "Palau is the most over-governed place on the planet, with 16 states and both a tribal chiefdom and elected legislature in each municipality, for 20,000 people. Someone will walk into a bar in Koror, the national capital, and yell "Hey governor!" Everyone gets the joke so half the patrons stand up." Can anyone help me with chapter and verse?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:04, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately, my library's holdings begin in 1995, so I can't help with getting the source. Can you provide further information? For example, do you remember anything about the cover of the issue (e.g. what was on it), to help someone to find it quickly? Do you have any sense of the title of this article? Any clue about what the other articles talked about? Time of year? I know you won't know most of these; I'm just trying to find anything that would make it easier to get this answer. Nyttend (talk) 04:27, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for getting back to me on this one. In 1990, NG issued a bound, two volume index of all articles since founding in 1888 (since online, but a members-only service). Most US libraries will have this index. What I do know is there were only two articles on Palau in that period. I'm going to say it was after September 1984, my first stop in Hawaii and thus my original interest, and no later than April 1991.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 06:27, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
It is on page 493 of the October 1986 issue. The citation is:
Patterson, Carolyn Bennett, et al. "At the Birth of Nations: In the Far Pacific." National Geographic Magazine, Oct. 1986. National Geographic Virtual Library, Accessed 17 May 2018.
Unfortunately, I can't give you a link because it is password protected. If you can get to a library with a subscription to the National Geographic Virtual Library though, you can read for yourself.
Lemme know if you need the exact quote. 70.67.222.124 (talk) 15:08, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
A friend with access sent me a copy of the page. I'll retype the passage:
The westernmost among the emerging nations of the Pacific, the Republic of Palau (or Belau), population more than 15,000, is divided into 16 separate states, each with its own governor, lieutenant governor, and legislature. Most state populations are very small, and one wonders if anyone has time for anything but government, American style and democratic though it may be.
An example is Peleliu, the tragic island where more than 13,000 Americans and Japanese died during less than three months of fighting, often hand to hand, in the autumn of 1944. Pat and I went to Peleliu from Koror, the republic's capital, by speedboat, a wave-tossing, rear-slapping 45 minutes, and arrived to discover it was election day, with five candidates running for governor. Although Peleliu claims a population of 2,000 people, only 400 actually live there. More registered voters live in Koror than on their home island, and 800 send votes from Guam. The situation is similar in Palau's other states.
A current joke puts a laugh in the truth. A man walks into a bar in Koror and calls out, "Hey, Governor!" And half the men in the place stand up.
But that's only the state story. The national government is headed by President Lazarus Salii, followed by a vice president, a cabinet responsible for five ministries, a judiciary, and a legislature with a 16-member house and a 14-member senate.
The there's the hereditary leadership. Each village has ten chiefs, ranked in importance. And, dividing the island group, there are two paramount chiefs. Never, I thought, have so few been governed by so many.
(See also: Never was so much owed by so many to so few.)
--76.69.47.55 (talk) 22:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Fantastic, thank you so much, everyone! Also thanks for the retype! My paraphrase was not bad for a 30-year-old memory!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:28, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Indian police shields

Just came across these police shields. The capture says they are Indian militarized forces pursuing Muslim protesters in Kashmir. How on earth they use such wicker-like stuff for shields? Brandmeistertalk 09:18, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

That's actually quite common for riot police, not only in India, but also here in Europe. These shields are lightweight, somewhat flexible and almost indestructible. Very effective when people throw stones or bottles. Jahoe (talk) 09:50, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
I personally doubt it somewhat, also given their gaps and apparently flammable nature. Obviously there are other lightweight and durable uniform materials around. Brandmeistertalk 10:04, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes, these ones are quite open. Here's an image from Amsterdam, 1966. [2] They are smaller, but more tightly woven. I've seen many news photos like this, from many countries. Jahoe (talk) 10:45, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Or see our article shield, it explicitly mentions woven reeds or wicker. Jahoe (talk) 11:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
They are not that flammable. And a Molotov-cocktail probably won't shatter on the shield, because the shield is lightweight and flexible. A bottle will just bounce off. Also, don't underestimate the value of locally sourced, cheap, plentiful. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
  • They're still used for training in the West - it's harder to injure someone with one, compared to polycarbonate. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:08, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
It rather depends on the perceived threat; wicker is suitable for defence against stones, sticks, bottles and bricks, or for containing a crowd. If Indian people aren't in the habit of throwing petrol bombs or pyrotechnics at their police officers, then why buy a more expensive and heavier replacement? Alansplodge (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Facing a crowd with shinai or lathi, I'd rather have a circular wicker shield than a heavy rectangular polycarbonate shield (and the US shields are ridiculous). Many European police shields are just too heavy, which encourages testudo tactics for a small crowd with weapons like petrol bombs, rather than a large and mobile crowd with sticks and rocks. The small circular polycarbonate shields are probably the best overall.
Sword and buckler has some relevance too. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:06, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
As Ogden Nash would say, "Poly is jolly, but wicker is quicker." Clarityfiend (talk) 02:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

May 18

Lloyd George in Brighton

In Lloyd George was My Father, Olwen Carey Evans mentions that while she was at Roedean School, her parents (David and Margaret Lloyd George) had a house in Brighton. I would be interested to know where it was. DuncanHill (talk) 20:37, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

I think it must have been in Chichester Terrace, in Kemp Town, the district of Brighton nearest Roedean. To judge by this (p. 170) he was living there in 1909, when Olwen would have been 16 or 17. For a few months in 1918 he borrowed Danny House, a huge Elizabethan mansion a few miles outside Brighton, but that would have been too late to fit the description. --Antiquary (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, after posting here I found some other references to him staying in property loaned by Lord Rendel in Kemptown, but of course Rendel owned a lot of Kemptown at the time. I've got Tempestuous Journey (the work you linked to), but hadn't found Brighton in the index. John Morley lived round the corner at Chesham Place around that time. This article mentions Clarendon Terrace, which runs into Chichester Terrace. I must go and have a look to see if there are any blue plaques. DuncanHill (talk) 12:50, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

May 19

Who was the Page to whom John Morley spoke of Woodrow Wilson?

In our article on John Morley we read that he told J. H. Morgan "I'm sick of Wilson... He hailed the Russian Revolution six months ago as the new Golden Age, and I said to Page, 'What does he know of Russia?' to which Page replied, 'Nothing'. As for his talk about a union of hearts after the war, the world is not made like that." The quotation is referenced to J. H. Morgan, John, Viscount Morley. An Appreciation and Some Reminiscences (London: John Murray, 1925), p. 92. DuncanHill (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

I think it must be Walter Hines Page, the American Ambassador to Britain. He's the only Page mentioned in the indices of Lloyd George's War Memoirs and Churchill's The World Crisis. DuncanHill (talk) 00:07, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Harry's wedding giggles

At the Harry and Meghan wedding, during the oath-taking part, why there were giggles after each of them replied "I will" to Archbishop's questions? The guests giggled both after Harry's and Meghan's reply. Did they say it wrong or something else? Thanks. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 14:43, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

It is customary for women there to giggle in joyful moments. 2600:1004:B154:6625:77EB:C50C:F78B:D57E (talk) 14:57, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
The crowds outside cheered when each of them said "I will" and everyone could hear them inside and thought it was amusing. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:01, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Vomiting in antiquity

Now we've all heard the vomitorium myth, and we've all heard the following correction. Usually this comes with the corrector insisting that ancient Romans did not intentionally overeat then vomit on purpose. ¶ In Julian's Misopogon, "But in my childhood a strange and senseless delusion came over me and persuaded me to war against my belly, so that I do not allow it to fill itself with a great quantity of food. [C] Thus it has happened to me most rarely of all men to vomit my food. And though I remember having this experience once, after I became Caesar, it was by accident and was not due to over-eating." ¶ Julian's humble-bragging throughout about his traditionalism and austerity, and this bit seems to imply that people (the "new" decadents at least?) were gorging and puking. Are there any other references to recreational indulgence and puking in the ancient sources, esp. earlier than this 4th C. one? Temerarius (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

There are some mentions in classical literature. Seneca writes about people who vomit so they can eat, then eat until they vomit ("vomunt ut edant, edunt ut vomant", in his Letter to Helvia). In his Moral Epistles he also mentions slaves whose job was clean the floor of drunken vomit. Seneca is a pearl-clutching moralist and he's probably not totally reliable about what Roman people actually did, but he is several hundred years earlier than Julian. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:32, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Some names here: Bulimia nervosa#Before the 20th century. 87.112.145.168 (talk) 17:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Hippocrates' Aphorisms

Aphorisms seems almost intentionally obscure at points. Could anyone help me untangle these particularly tough ones?

  • 19. Neither give nor enjoin anything to persons during periodical paroxysms, but abstract from the accustomed allowance before the crisis.
  • 23. The evacuations are to be judged of not by their quantity, but whether they be such as they should be, and how they are borne. And when proper to carry the evacuation to deliquium animi, this also should be done, provided the patient can support it.
  • 59. A true tertian comes to a crisis in seven periods at furthest.
  • 49. To procure the expulsion of the secundines, apply a sternutatory, and shut the nostrils and mouth.
  • 58. Strangury supervenes upon inflammation of the rectum, and of the womb, and strangury supervenes upon suppuration of the kidney, and hiccup upon inflammation of the liver.

Temerarius (talk) 16:41, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

They are not particularly obscure - the meaning are clear, as long as you understand the meanings of the words. You seem to have got hold of a fairly old translation, in which certain less pleasant topics are hidden from the tender sensitivities of the ordinary reader by retaining Latin or medical terms. In other words, they are using terms that doctors would understand, but their patients would not. For example, 49. To ensure that the afterbirth is expelled, put something to make the woman sneeze up her nose, then block her nose and mouth.Once you know what secundines and sternutatory mean, the phrase makes perfect sense (though I wouldn't recommend using it during childbirth). You can work them out with a dictionary. Wymspen (talk) 19:28, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Giovanni Antonio Facchinetti de Nuce birthplace

Can anyone help find a reliable source saying where it:Giovanni Antonio Facchinetti de Nuce was born/just confirming the obvious that he is Italian? it.wiki says Bologna, which I'm sure is true, but there is no reliable sourcing for it. I need it for a potential featured list I am working on, and despite being halfway decent about finding things on obscure dead Italian clerics, I am coming up blank. The two sources in that article are self-published, so I wouldn't want to use them. Pinging Ealdgyth as well: outside your time and geography, but you have experience with digging up facts on long-dead clerics, so worth asking. Currently all I can find is Catholic-heirarchy and Miranda, both of which are self-published. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:59, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

And found thanks to hints from Ealdgyth. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Why is Duke so prominent in the titles of most British Princes?

If all the nobles are called Rank of Place why does only the Crown Prince have Prince of Place as his primary title? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:08, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Are you asking why Prince William, Duke of Cambridge is not simply "Prince of Cambridge"? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:29, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes (or at least Prince of Cambridge, Duke of Somewhere Else). Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:39, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Because he's a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Why settle for Cambridge when you have the whole nation? (btw, Prince is a titular dignity, Duke is a peerage title. And "nobility" is more germaine to continental Europe than the UK). It doesn't make much sense to worry about "why". Things are the way they are because they were so done in history, and not really on the basis of logic. - Nunh-huh 23:47, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Sagittarian_Milky_Way -- Wales is a historical principality (often independent of England before 1282). There has never been any territorial principality of Cambridge, and William is already a prince anyway, so there's no point in creating a Princedom of Cambridge.... AnonMoos (talk) 00:47, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
AnonMoos has it right... It really has to do with land (and thus income). In the Middle Ages, all of the children and grandchildren (and sometimes even great-grandchildren) of a King were styled “Prince Name” (or “Princess Name”)... an example of this is the famous "Prince John" of Robin Hood fame (later to become King John of England).
Simply being styled "Prince Name" (or "Princess Name"), however, could cause problems for chroniclers... because sometimes there would be multiple princes in the family with the same name. So, to tell them apart, the place of their birth would be added on. An example is John of Gaunt (who was so called because he was born in Ghent) ... the "of Gaunt" was added to distinguish him from his uncle Prince John of Eltham, Earl of Cornwall).
The key thing is that the honorific “Prince”/"Princess" did not come with lands attached, and in the middle ages a noble needed land to maintain his/her household. So... when a Prince or Princess came of age, he/she would be granted titles that DID come with land... Duke/Dutchess, Earl/Countess, Baron/Barroness, etc. (For example, John of Gaunt was granted a Dukedom - and became the first Duke of Lancaster.)
things are a little different in modern times... it is still traditional for young princes and princesses to be given a title when they get married. They are still styled "Prince Name"... but with their new title attached (as in Prince William, Duke of Cambridge). Their children (the next generation) are also styled "Prince/Princess Name" ... however since Royals no longer travel around as much (and so there is a likelihood that multiple princes/princesses will be born in the same London hospital) it has become tradition to use their royal parent's senior title to tell them apart (so, the son of the Duke of Cambridge is styled "Prince George of Cambridge, while the daughters of the Duke of York are styled "Princess Beatrice of York" and Princess Eugenie of York).
The one exception to all this is the title “Prince of Wales”. The title “Prince of Wales” pre-existed use by the English royal family... and (more importantly) it came with land (ie income). As AnonMoos notes above, Wales was a separate country... a Principality... and those who claimed to be the rulers of Wales had long called themselves “Prince of Wales”. When Edward I of England conquered Wales, he took over that title (by right of conquest). I suppose that Edward could have claimed that HE was now “Prince of Wales" as well as King of England... but, for political reasons, he instead gave it to his eldest son (the future Edward II). It subsequently became tradition for the title "Prince of Wales" to be granted to the eldest son of all Kings of England. Blueboar (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Did preindustrial dukes have the lower ranks of the barony, viscounty etc. that their main mansion or castle was in? Did everyone pay rent to the level above them and receive it from the level below (possibly skipping the levels above commoner and duke?)? Interestingly the world has at least one Kings County, Queens County, King and Queen County, Prince County, Dukes County, and Dutchess County but no Princess County (only Princess X County). The one time a proliferous namer loved this generic eponymous style (4 out of 12) the queen was infertile so no princesses. (the lone Duchess County is also spelled archaically) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:26, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes... sort of... see our article on Fudalism for more. Most Royal Princes were given several lesser titles as well as a Dukedom... land equaled wealth, and power... so Members of the Royal family were given lots of land. This kept the wealth and power in the family (which worked as long as the family did not squabble over who had the best claim to be the next King.) Blueboar (talk) 18:05, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
No, SMW. The spelling with the "t" is the archaic version. Meghan M. is now the Duchess of Sussex, not the Dutchess of Sussex. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:09, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
But Duchess County doesn't exist and redirects to the only Dutchess County in the world (probably) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:26, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Although of the royal duchies, only the Duchy of Lancaster (the Queen) and the Duchy of Cornwall (Prince Charles) bestow any income today. Alansplodge (talk) 19:16, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Note the difference between a duchy and a dukedom. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:09, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Quite right, mea culpa. Alansplodge (talk) 12:26, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Noblesse oblige, sine qua non, habeus corpus and in vino veritas to you. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

May 20

Name of 1624 papal bull?

According to the article at Urban VIII:

Pope Urban VIII issued a 1624 papal bull that made the use of tobacco in holy places punishable by excommunication;[1] Pope Benedict XIII repealed the ban one hundred years later.[2]

What was this bull called? Can I find its text, or an image of a copy, anywhere? It is not listed at List of papal bulls. HLHJ (talk) 00:41, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

One was for sale a few years ago here. DuncanHill (talk) 00:49, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not seeing it in List of papal bulls. The obvious title, had the Pope known, would have been Bull Durham.Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:05, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Should be Cum ecclesiae, but the date was 30 January 1642, not 1624. - Nunh-huh 01:18, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
To be pedantic, I don't think it's a "bull", which is a specific kind of papal document. In general usage everyone always seems to call everything issued by a pope a "bull"...our List of papal bulls also suffers from this problem. Cum ecclesiae appears to be just a plain old papal letter. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:27, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Is there an "official" list somewhere? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:47, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure...the Vatican website has lists of papal documents divided by pope but it only goes back to Leo XIII, which is not very far in papal terms. But the definition of "bull" and "letter" (and the more recent "encyclical" have changed over time, and initially a "bulla" is just the seal attached to the document, so something might be called a "bull" that is not exactly a bull in the modern sense. I haven't found a particular list but I'm sure there is one. I would be surprised if some dusty old 19th century German historian didn't make a list of them. There's probably something useful in the sources of our own List of papal bulls article, but our list itself is unreliable. Adam Bishop (talk) 23:36, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Gately, Iain (2001). Tobacco: A Cultural History of How an Exotic Plant Seduced Civilization. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-8021-3960-4. 
  2. ^ Cutler, Abigail. "The Ashtray of History", The Atlantic Monthly, January/February 2007.

Aslan Verlag

Hi there, I have seen some books which are printed in the early 1900s from a publisher called Aslan and the place of print is - as the book says - in Grenzach-Wyhlen. I asked the government of Grenzach-Wyhlen (Germany) if they can tell me anything about the publisher Aslan, for example in which street he was based or when did he closed his publishing house, or when he started his business but the government told me, they have neither any information about this company neither ever registered any publisher called Aslan or Aslan Verlag in Grenzach-Wyhlen. Can somebody help me and find out anything about the publisher Aslan? It sounds a bit strange that the government of a city has no information about a publisher of over 100 books (when I google for "Aslan grenzlach-wyhlen" I am finding many references to books published by this comapny). Thanks! --Saegen zeugen des sofas jehovas (talk) 03:51, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

It is strange that a book printed in the early 1900s would use a town name that did not come into use until 1975: before that those were two separate towns (each significant enough to have their own railway station), and I would expect a printing works to be in one or the other. Wymspen (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm finding works published in the 1990s by this publisher. They all appear to be by one Mehmet Aslan. DuncanHill (talk) 12:40, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Could it be that some of the books are "re-prints" (ie books that were originally published in the early 1900s, by another publisher, and subsequently re-published by a modern company)? I also note that there is an Aslan Publishing Co. in the US (named after the CS Lewis character)... but that seems unrelated to this query. Blueboar (talk) 14:51, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
No, they include references to works published in the 1980s and 90s. DuncanHill (talk) 15:00, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
In this one there is an address in Grenzach-Wyhlen for Mehmet Aslan. (bottom of page 4). DuncanHill (talk) 15:02, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Why was the Grand Duchy of Lithuania so preposterously underpopulated?

Such a vast territory only had at most 3 million people according to Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The article refers to several devastating wars but it's not like devastating wars aren't a routine part of the pre-modern world. There must have been periods of stability in order for such a large area to be held together. So why was this place so underpopulated throughout its existence?

Muzzleflash (talk) 08:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Historical Demographics
noframe
Altar Domitius Ahenobarbus Louvre
Articles
Demographic history
Historical demography
World population estimates
List of Countries by Population
1600 1700 1800
That number is not particularly low compared to other contemporary regions; cf: List of countries by population in 1700. Note that the world population in 1750 was about 790M. —2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 14:16, 20 May 2018 modified:2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 06:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC) (UTC)2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 13:34, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
You also have to take into consideration the physical geography of the Grand Duchy... and ask whether it could have supported a larger population? The answer to that is "no". Much of historic Lithuania (comprising parts of modern Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, etc.) was either step-land or swamp... not really conducive to farming (and thus supporting large population centers) given the technology of the time. Blueboar (talk) 14:35, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Geography of Lithuania might be helpful in that regard (map shows mostly wetland and highland). —2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 15:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
See also List of countries by population in 1000 and Medieval demography. Alansplodge (talk) 19:12, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Muzzleflash -- I'm not sure where the 3 million figure comes from, but the eastern territories which were part of Poland-Lithuania during the late middle ages included large areas which were vulnerable to incursions of successive waves of steppe horse-nomads, from the Huns to (most destructively) the Mongols. The balance of military power didn't decisively shift from horse-nomads to settled agriculturalist communities until the 16th century. (Much of Russian history during the 16th and 17th centuries was concerned with mopping up various remnant "Hordes"/Khanates or political structures based on historic horse-nomad conquests, and opening up such areas to peasant settlement.) AnonMoos (talk) 21:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

May 21

How do illegal immigrants prove that a child is born in the US?

If an illegal immigrant family chooses to avoid hospitals because they are too costly, then they may give birth at home. And if they deliver the child at home, then they need documentation of the child's existence as a US citizen . . . to undocumented parents. If the parents show themselves to the authorities that their child is a US citizen, then wouldn't they simultaneously be discovered that they are illegal/undocumented immigrants? What if the US-born child has older, foreign-born siblings who also arrived illegally or got an expired visa? Will the US-born baby have to be deported along with the rest of the family? Or will the family be ripped apart, in which case the illegal immigrants get deported while the US-born baby gets adopted by American citizens? SSS (talk) 01:30, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

As to the last question, see Anchor baby. --76.69.47.55 (talk) 01:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
This website gives some basic information about obtaining a birth certificate for unassisted home births. Midwives will help getting a birth certificate if they are involved. In California, the parents are not required to furnish citizenship information in order to register the birth of their child, but perhaps some states ask that. Normally, only the place of birth of the parents is asked. It is to the benefit of parents and the baby to register the birth. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Need someone who REALLY knows how British royal titles work.

On the talk page of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex‎ and in various sources that have no apparent expertise in this area, it has been claimed that there is such a person as "Princess Henry" in the royal family. This strikes me as being batshit insane. Does anyone know the exact rules for this sort of thing? --Guy Macon (talk) 04:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

This article attempts to explain it.[3]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:53, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
British_princess#Use_of_the_title_Princess_by_virtue_of_marriage. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Got it. Royal family naming rules really are batshit insane. [www.princessmichael.org.uk] I will now go back to pondering in what way Xena and Mulan are "princesses". --Guy Macon (talk) 05:25, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Mulan killed more people in one scene than were killed in the entire Rambo series. Do you want to tell her she can't be a princess? Iapetus (talk) 08:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
There was a time when Princess Michael of Kent was constantly in the headlines. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 08:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
And I'm sure "Out Val" could give Mulan a run for her money. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC) (p.s. also noted for her fine taste in jewelery).
As could Xena. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
It’s not any more insane than addressing someone as “Mrs John Smith” as that article mentions. And they don’t have last names so “Duchess Henry” is the only option if you’re being super old fashioned. Even my wife once received a letter for “Mrs. Adam Bishop” and she doesn’t even have the same last name as me. Stupid old traditions are hard to kill. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Someone should tell that Mrs Betty Mountbatten. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I suppose if we want to be consistent about such things, and yet all modern and non-sexist ... if Princess Charlotte of Cambridge gets married to a commoner, we should probably call her husband "Prince Charlotte of Cambridge". Blueboar (talk) 12:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

The old traditional rule was that if a woman owes an honorific to marriage, then it should not be added directly before her given (first) name. This applied to "Mrs", as well as to noble and royal stuff, so that an ordinary married woman would be known as "Mrs. John Smith", not as "Mrs. Mary Smith". In Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, "Lady Catherine de Bourgh" is known as such because she derives the "lady" honorific from being the daughter of an earl, while "Lady Lucas" (with the honorific before the surname) has her honorific from being married to a knight. In modern times, this explains why "Diana, Princess of Wales" was considered more correct than "Princess Diana". At the very top, "Queen" was an exception... AnonMoos (talk) 12:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea what connection the discussion below is supposed to have with anything in particular. "Queen" was an exception because it was prefixed to the first (given) name of a queen consort. If "Queen" followed the pattern of lower-level honorifics, then "Queen Mary" could only refer to a queen regnant... AnonMoos (talk) 10:05, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Not sure what a a British rock band has to do with it. Is that why that article says "Queen are" instead "Queen is"? Because of the royal "we"? --Guy Macon (talk) 16:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Queen are an example of notional agreement. DuncanHill (talk) 16:46, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Like saying "Manchester have won the EFL Cup" vs. "Philadelphia has won the Lombardi Trophy". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:30, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Of course, anybody who said the former would immediately be asked: "City or United?" (The third alternative (NB: not The 3rd Alternative or even The 3rd Alternative) would be too unlikely, at least for a few years, though I applaud the sentiment.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.221.82.140 (talk) 00:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Note the singular plural about Coventry in World Forum/Communist Quiz. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Not sure why I need to, as I was in no way disagreeing on the subject of notional agreement, with which I entirely agree and habitually use, and was, following Guy Macon's initial joke, merely making a further joke (hence the small print) about the ambiguosity of referring to an English soccer team only as "Manchester". {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.221.82.140 (talk) 16:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Notability

Dear Editors,
I wrote a new article about Ms. Hanna Akiva, a disabled Israeli activist. I edited it until reference#13 (A clash with the police in Hertzliya). The rest was a machine translation, which has not been edited yet.
Is the article notable? The goal of the article is to describe the battle of the disabled vs the Israeli government from the viewpoint of Akiva, who was the most broadcasted person at this struggle. Thank you for your replies here. Dgw (talk) 08:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Just to be pedantic... Articles are never notable. What is (or is not) notable is the subject of the article (usually a person or an event). I don't know enough about Ms. Akiva to say if she is notable or not... but Wikipedia:Notability (people) should guide you. As for your goal... please read our WP:Neutral point of view policy. If your goal is to present things from a specific POV, you are going to have serious problems. If you are trying to "make a point", Wikipedia is not the right venue for that. Blueboar (talk) 12:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Hanna Akiva meets the WP:BASIC notability guideline of a person who has received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. References number 12 to 31 still need to be linked into the draft text. DroneB (talk) 12:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you DroneB for your reply and reading the article. After your reply, I would be glad to continue editing it from WP:NPOV, and thank you again. Dgw (talk) 14:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Refugees

There has been a tremendous amount of argument in developed countries lately about refugees. The premise is generally that they are economic migrants who have crossed through many possible countries where they could have taken refuge, to get to one where they can make more money. As such they get a frosty reception from locals who see them as a force dragging their country down to the global average income.

The question is - do these intermediate countries where asylum is easy really exist? Who are they? I have read, for example, that Nicaragua was taking a lot of refugees, though they didn't make much money. I know that Jordan and Turkey took a tremendous number of Syrians, but I don't know how tolerably they were treated. But is there a global-scale perspective that says that yes, people seeking refuge can actually go somewhere easily to be safe? And is there any overall movement for wealthier countries to try to fund and organize destination countries that are providing refuge cheaply, so as to give the refugees other options? Wnt (talk) 14:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

If you're talking about the ones fleeing from Syria, isn't it more about survival, which is most basic of the hierarchy of needs? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The answer for Wnt is found at xenophobia. --Jayron32 15:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Let's try this again, more briefly: Are there countries where refugees (if able to reach them) can go and reliably, easily be able to live a safe and free life there, even if a poor one? If so, where? Wnt (talk) 18:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
No. There is absolutely no country with a 100% open immigration policy. All countries have some sort of stipulation on immigration. Therefore, if you ask your question about all refugees, there will be at least one refugee that can't get into whichever country to pick. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 19:07, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
A place like Sealand might, but it has limited space. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:28, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
[citation needed] [4] doesn't exactly sound like an open immigration policy. It's actually far more restrictive than nearly every other country. Note also that although Sealand used to (I think) hand out passports [5] and for a fee still hands out identity cards [6], titles of nobility [7] and let you rent (they say own, but you only own it for 10 years and then have to renew) a square foot piece of land [8], AFAICT these don't affect your likely inability to visit Sealand. Nil Einne (talk) 09:02, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

May 22

Who is with Lloyd George

Can anyone identify the gentleman pictured here with David Lloyd George please? The picture is from the rear dustjacket of Frank Owen's Tumultuous Journey - Lloyd George his Life and Times. DuncanHill (talk) 01:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Just to be sure, have you checked to see if the photo also occurs inside the book? --76.69.47.55 (talk) 02:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes I have. DuncanHill (talk) 09:14, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I sought, but found not. Sorry. Alansplodge (talk) 21:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Does the Greek sea god Triton have a counterpart in Roman mythology?

I can't find the answer to this on Google. Sphinxmystery (talk) 06:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Our article on Salacia, wife of Neptune, says they had three children. One of whom was Triton. So Triton is in both Roman and Greek mythology. The references for this fact are not online. Rmhermen (talk) 06:57, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
The German Wikipedia claims that the relationship of Neptune and Triton is "disputed". Apparently Neptune had an independent mythology in Latin and also Etruscan cultures (as Nethune), so that not all features of Poseidon were taken over when the two where later identified. No clear sources are given, though. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 07:00, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

What does this sign mean?

What does this sign mean? It looks like it's saying H2O-KT 5. What does that mean? Bus stop (talk) 07:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Avocado in Spanish is aguacate. H2O = water/agua. So, H20KT is a reference to avocados (KT is pronounced "kah tay" in Spanish). 5 would presumably be the price in Dominican pesos. I only got the hint when I found this old blog. clpo13(talk) 07:58, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
(After Edit conflict) I'm not sure where you found it, but that image is actually used in our Avocado article, with the caption "Selling avocados in Santo Domingo, DR". It was uploaded by User:Caballero1967. Maybe you could ask that user. HiLo48 (talk) 08:05, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I think that Clpo13 explained it fully and well. Caballero/Historiador 13:03, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
According to the Real Academia website, aguacate is derived from náhuatl ahuacatl. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:06, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Here's a funny little illustration.[9]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
And here's further info from EO.[10]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:10, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Wow—nice. Bus stop (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
So it's a kind of rebus. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:12, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for that reference. It is interesting that H2O needs no translation. Bus stop (talk) 12:52, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I suggest adding this explanation to the photo caption in avocado. (It's semi-protected, so I can't.) --76.69.47.55 (talk) 13:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Done. Good idea. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks and thanks. Could you subscript the 2, please? --76.69.47.55 (talk) 08:45, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Done. — Kpalion(talk) 15:21, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Schengen Area

A tourist from a developed country can do a four month long vacation in south-east asia: for example one month in Vietnam, one in Thailand, one in Philippines, one in Malaysia. Each of those countries allow 90 day long tourist visits to their country for citizens of most developed countries.

Pre-EU, a tourist can do a similar vacation in four different European countries, spending one month in each.

But after the establishment of EU and the Schengen Area, this is no longer possible as it is now the cumulative time spend in the Schengen Area that's counting towards the 90 days limit. This obviously hurts the EU tourism industry.

Has there been any hearings, proposals, or draft legislation in the European Parliament that deal with this issue? Or is this too niche of an issue for them to care about? (The number of tourists who can afford +90 days long vacations in the EU is probably small.) Mũeller (talk) 09:37, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

I would object to "obviously hurts" - I think the number of candidates would be very small. Moreover, they are probably all from New Zealand, and New Zealand has an exception ;-). More seriously, the few affected can just apply for a long-stay visum, or they pop over to Britain for a shopping trip and then re-enter Schengen. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Why just New Zealand? Australia to Europe flights probably aren't much less expensive. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
As I understand it, New Zealand had already individual agreements with all or most of the Schengen countries, including the former Eastern Block members. So they got a special rule. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:20, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
@Stephan Schulz Thanks for the input. The actual Schengen Area rule is "90 days out of 180 days", so popping out and back in again won't work. Mũeller (talk) 03:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
While you may be right on that point, I don't see what's stopping people applying for a long-stay visa. It's true that this involves a lot more work and could be denied and also doesn't allow free movement (as I believe the NZ exemption), but the nature of visas and visa-exemptions means they are always a balance of different demands. (I mean you can probably find one individual who would like to be a genuine tourist in the EU for 2 years and would be more likely to do it if they could and without all the hoopla that may be involved.) In this case, the maximum of 90 days would likely have been seen as the best balance of differing demands, especially as the likely small negative effect was likely seen as considerably outweighed by the benefit to tourism of having a single system and the reason for limiting it to 90 days (I presume to reduce the possibility of visa misuse). Nil Einne (talk) 07:04, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Christianity

WP:DENY.--WaltCip (talk) 13:10, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Is Christianity going to be a propaganda site or the historical reality of a false religion? For now it is propaganda. No Christian has ever established the existence of a human Jesus Christ. He is a literary creation. [1]Sahansdal (talk) 11:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

We do not predict the future here. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 12:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Sahansdal apparently objects to the contents of the article Christianity. Wikipedia has a neutral point of view and should not claim that religious beliefs are true or false in articles about religion. Christianity makes a lot of formulations to show it is about the beliefs of the religion, e.g. these in the lead: "They believe that Jesus is the Son of God", "These professions of faith state that Jesus suffered, died, was buried, descended into hell, and rose from the dead", "The creeds further maintain that Jesus physically ascended into heaven". Jesus#Historical views and Sources for the historicity of Jesus discuss Jesus from a historical perspective. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

References

Quote origin

When I originally learned this quote (back in the 80s), it was attributed to Nietzsche, but I cannot find it documented anywhere. "Life is a vast black plain upon which blind brutes grope for rocks with which to crush the skulls of their fellows."

My google-fu has failed me. Can anyone confirm its origin? Tdjewell (talk) 12:21, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

The only Nietzsche quote I can find on "blind brutes" is "Such a change can begin only with individuals, for the masses are blind brutes, as we know to our cost." --Jayron32 17:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I looked for some possible original German language keywords for your quote at nietzschesource.org (digital critical edition of Nietzsche's complete works and letters), but found nothing even remotely fitting. (e.g. I searched "blind", "Schädel", "Steine" etc.) If Nietzsche did indeed write this, it should be findable there, maybe someone else will have more luck than I did ... ---Sluzzelin talk 18:22, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
There is something vaguely along those lines in a D H Lawrence Poem, "Know Thyself, and that Thou art Mortal." [books.google.co.uk] Wymspen (talk) 21:20, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Those Google links tell the world God knows what about your IP/MAC address/GPS/sexual orientation/etc. Plus, clicking on one got me straight to a "restricted page fuck off" result. But [11] (the same link cut after the first page number) gets me to a page I can read. Wnt (talk) 22:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Related: "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come." --Matt Groening, from before the time when The Simpsons became Zombie Simpsons (Google it). --Guy Macon (talk) 02:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

May 23

Is this bitcoin mining company using at least 1% of the electricity generated in China?

"Bitmain, a Chinese bitcoin miner and designer of chips, made $4bn last year" [12]

Bitmain's facility is in Dalad Banner, Inner Mongolia. They had a payroll of only 50 at that facility according to a NYT article in 2017. Considering the lack of overhead except for electricity and amount of profit, it's possible to imagine they consumed tens of billions of dollars of electricity in a year.

Was this one company using 1%+ of China's electricity last year?

Muzzleflash (talk) 13:01, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

You appear to be confusing a company that makes money selling hardware for bit`coin mining with a company that makes money mining bitcoins. Bitmain is both. You also appear to be confusing companies that do mining for themselves and companies that run mining pools. Bitmain does both, and "how much of the computing power is their hardware as opposed to others contributing their devices is unknown."[13] --Guy Macon (talk) 15:32, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
At the very least there is a huge facility in Inner Mongolia owned by Bitmain. And according to the Economist article most of Bitmain's earnings are from mining it does directly. This makes it possible to roughly assume the $4 billion profits figure is in the ballpark of what is earned by Bitmain from mining directly rather than selling hardware. Muzzleflash (talk) 22:43, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Maternity leaves

I have some questions regarding maternity leaves.

  • Do maternity leaves start before the childbirth? Has there been a time where the mother predicts inaccurately the baby's due date and thus, the baby comes out earlier or later than expected so the mother either has to give birth while at work or has to waste a couple of days of maternity leave?
  • Given that maternity leaves are about 3 months long, does that mean the new mother has to wean the child by the end of the 3 months?
  • Can the new mother extend the unpaid maternity leave a bit by consuming earned vacation leaves, extending another 3 weeks using paid vacation time? Alternatively, if the mother wants to breastfeed her young for a whole year or two, then she may exit the workforce and become a stay-at-home mother?
  • Suppose the mother wants to return to the workforce ASAP, because her husband doesn't make enough income to support the whole family. If she leaves the child at Grandpa and Grandma's house, then will the breastmilk stop producing during work hours? Or does the new mother have to keep track of time and make sure to wean the baby within 3 months?

SSS (talk) 21:09, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Please specify which country/jurisdiction you are asking about. The regulations and policies vary widely. Thanks! 70.67.222.124 (talk) 21:13, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
The first two questions do not seem to be concerned with legal regulations and policies. The third question seems to be a local policy question, so that can be omitted. The last question seems more related to biology, whether human females would stop lactating anytime they wish. SSS (talk) 22:03, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. Maternity leave is strongly dependent on legal regulations and policies and local norms. In NZ paid parental leave is going to slowly increase to 26 weeks but the OECD average is 48 weeks. [14] Paid parental leave isn't quite the same thing as maternity leave since again, depending on location regulations, policies and norms, it may be possible for the father or some other caregiver to take some of that leave. But you mention 3 months which is clearly a short time in OECD terms considering that the former 18 weeks in NZ, which is longer than 3 months, was for good reasons considered short.

I suspect your source is referring to the US. It's often remarked that the situation in the US is quite limited especially for those in low-wage jobs [15] probably at least in part due to few legal requirements hence why Trump's proposal received some attention despite still being very limited [16].

With such a short period, it's reasonable that the mother may wish to take as much of it as they feel they can after the pregnancy rather than before. It's mentioned in my first source how the first 6 months are considered important by WHO guidelines implying that even with the future 26 weeks in NZ, there may still be a desire to minimise the time taken beforehand. And besides the parents wishes, again precisely when it can start will depend on local policies, regulations and norms.

As mentioned below, we're also talking about 'paid' leave here. Again unpaid leave may be an option but again how much of an option this is will depend on local policies, regulations and norms. Some jurisdictions may guarantee a period of unpaid leave. (I.E. It has to be offered on request with the job having to be held open probably with very limited exceptions.) Others may not, so it will depend on local norms and the specific employer. (Often large employers are better, but not always. To a point, a higher salary often also means better other conditions.) And there are all the additional complications like part time work, contract work and zero hour contracts.

You also mention paid vacation time. Again local regulations, policies and norms will influence how this interacts with any paid parental leave. Notably you mentioned 3 weeks but why? In NZ you're entitled to 4 weeks of annual leave in a simple situation [17] and as our article illustrates that's often the minimum (e.g. required in the EU) but some countries have 5 weeks or more. (5.6 weeks in the UK.)

Nil Einne (talk) 08:40, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

I would add that while not just a jurisdictional thing, age of weaning does tend to vary depending on several factors including local norms. Nil Einne (talk) 08:40, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
There's some more discussion of the situation in NZ here [18]. BTW I see you mentioned the mother returning to work because her husband (not sure why you assume she must have a husband) doesn't make enough. This makes me thinks you're only considering unpaid leave which isn't really the norm in a lot of the OECD further highlighting why your dismissal was wrong. For clarity, I'm not saying financial stress isn't possible since even in places with paid leave guarantees, it may not be the full salary or even close to it depending on the salary. E.g. in NZ the maximum is currently NZ$$538.55 a week before tax [19]. In the UK it's evidently even lower after 6 weeks £145.18 per week [20]. Still the aim of such schemes tend to be to reduce the chance that financial stress will force an early return and there may be topups from the employer again depending on local norms etc. Incidentally, while investigating the UK I made up this case [21] which gives some info on how things work in the UK including the guaranteed starting dates for leave for that scenario. I should also clarify that while sometimes the guaranteed leave may be shared in some fashion between parents, in other cases it may be a separate entitlement. Nil Einne (talk)
2. mother can express milk and put milk in the fridge
4. milk doesn't dry up when mother expresses milk
Sleigh (talk) 22:13, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
At the end of her maternity leave, the mother may have access to other forms of leave, such as long service leave, or leave without pay. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:39, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Regarding the milk issue, see breast pump. I have not met a mother who has not used one. It's fairly standard in the developed world for women to pump milk as needed; even when both my wife an I were at home, she would pump so there would be excess milk, so that I could handle night-time feedings and give her a rest for a bit. --Jayron32 11:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
I revise my question. Now, I just want to know whether or not women generally wean the infants at the end of the maternity leave (however long it takes, depending on local regulations). So, if the local regulation says 3 weeks, then the mothers have to wean at 3 weeks. If the local regulation says half a year, then the mother has to wean at half a year. But regardless of the local regulation, the mother has to wean the child off her milk when the maternity leave is up. Otherwise, wouldn't she produce milk during inconvenient work hours? SSS (talk) 17:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
" . . . wouldn't she produce milk during inconvenient work hours?" I myself (male) produce urine during work hours, but dealing with it is not a problem. SSS, You seem to have some peculiar notions about milk expression: it doesn't squirt out of its own accord according to a set timetable; it is mostly released when the nipple is stimulated by the suckling of a baby, or by the suction of an artifact such as a breast pump, which latter can be done in privacy if and as necessary. It is usually expressed involuntarily in any quantity only if neither of these methods are being used. Moreover, there is generally a transition period during which lactation tapers off; it doesn't normally stop abruptly (there is no effective and safe way of making this happen), because weaning an infant is itself a prolonged process of overlapping nutrition, not an instant change from milk to solid food. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.221.82.140 (talk) 18:50, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
As far as I know, there are no laws mandating breast feeding for any length of time. Some women are unable to breastfeed, or find it very difficult to do so, and start babies on infant formula shortly after birth. Regarding age when weaning occurs, this page has a huge amount of data on the subject. --Jayron32 18:05, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
You appear to be labouring under some misapprehensions which admittedly the current terminology does not help. The World Health Organisation recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of an infant's life; to the best of my knowledge, this has always meant no other substance (water, formula milk, pablum, etc.) but I am not clear whether WHO means "only directly from the mother's breast". Some babies are fed by wet nurses (I worked on that article and yes, if you check the references, it is still - or once again - a thing). Some mothers exchange or sell their milk - not just to human milk banks but informally e.g. by eBay. And the word "wean" can mean different things to different people: are you using it to mean "cease lactating" or "cease bringing the baby to the breast"? It is certainly possible to feed an infant on nothing but the mother's milk, even if she is away at work. (See for example the US military's policy on breastfeeding as an active duty soldier.[22]) Jayron32 said above that all the mothers of his acquaintance use breast pumps; that is in my experience an American perspective[23]. The use of pumps is not widespread in many countries - here is some global industry data. US law, which grants its citizens the least maternity leave in the world, requires companies to provide lactation rooms for employees to pump, not places to which babies may be brought (as in other places and times). "Historian Jill Lepore argues that the "non-bathroom lactation room" and breast pumps generally are driven by corporate need for workers rather than mothers' wishes or babies' needs.[1]" You wrote "the mother has to wean the child off her milk when the maternity leave is up" - no, that's not the case. If the infant has begun to accept what are called "solid foods" (but are in reality mush), then a six- or nine- or twelve-month old can be breastfed morning and night (i.e. before and after the mother's work day) and eat "solids" and/or formula milk in between. The mother's milk production waxes and wanes in tandem with her infant's needs. It's like any other organ emptying and filling; think of stomachs and bladders. Adults plan around bodily functions and are not controlled by them. Breastfeeding isn't an all or nothing deal. Like a lot of human life, it's flexible. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 19:11, 24 May 2018 (UTC)


References

  1. ^ Lepore, Jill (12 January 2009). "Baby Food: If breast is best, why are women bottling their milk?". The New Yorker. Retrieved 29 December 2017. 

Sting credit card numbers - have they ever been tried?

I just got a call from the usual sort of scammer who has an apparently local number who tells me that they have an urgent message about my credit card account... I assume that if I stayed on the line, eventually I'd be presented with an opportunity to enter my credit card number, verification code, expiration date, etc., all in the name of "security". And then, ay caramba, a withdrawal might show up on the account! But I don't actually know because given I'm not going to give them a number there's no point to be made.

Still ... in theory, it should be possible to have a known invalid card number and data from some credit card company that, when all used together, causes them to give the appearance of a valid account, while they report that regrettably the credit limit is reached, server is temporarily down, some other excuse. While setting off an instant notification that the number is a scam and allowing the company to take some action. Of course, one could give a credit card number that fails the checksum scheme or otherwise doesn't exist, or is on some public list of sting numbers if it existed, but then scammers could look it up and know. Instead, it seems like an Irate Citizen would be best served by requesting his or her own special sting number from a company, then perhaps even submitting reports when they use it and with whom they shared it "just to confirm for security reasons".

Such a thing would seem in any given company's best interest ... but has it ever actually been implemented? Wnt (talk) 21:27, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

This was suggested five years ago in the FTC Robocall challenge.[24] You can do 90% of what you suggested with a prepaid credit card that has a couple of cents left on it.
Alas, it won't help. The way credit card theft works is that the crooks get a bunch of credit card nummers (and associated names, SS numbers, etc. if they can get them) then sell the entire set of stolen cards on the black market all at once. If they can, they sell the whole thing to a single customer. If the price isn't right, they sell sell them one at a time on the dark web. Once someone starts using the numbers, the clock starts as the credit card issuing banks begin investigating. Once they've identified where the breach occurred they figure out when the crooks started stealing the data, make a list of all potentially stolen cards, notify the customers, and disable the stolen cards. The stolen cards are now worthless. This all happens way faster than you can submit a report. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:53, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
  • It might be better to have a government-operated sting operation that creates bogus customers using bogus names and real credit card numbers. When called by a scammer, provide the info and then do a real-time traceback when the scammer uses the number. Same for e-mail scammers. -Arch dude (talk) 23:24, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

On a much more basic level, I got a call about ten years ago which started "I'm from Cardholder Services--". Since I didn't have any cards at that point, I took great pleasure in interrupting the call right there, saying "I don't have any cards, so I know you're lying", and immediately slamming down the phone... SFriendly.gif -- AnonMoos (talk) 07:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

May 24

Stupid question

Do anti-fraud laws cover magic that only steals from society a tiny amount of inflation? They don't have to but if they aren't lawyery enough one could argue that putting a fake gold nugget into the Indian in the Cupboard cabinet and selling it wouldn't be fraud since it's real gold. Is it allowed to ask a genie to make you win a huge bet at a casino? Is it illegal to ask a genie for tomorrow's lottery numbers? Or just to win money with them? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

As per our article, magic is a performing art designed to entertain by staged tricks or illusions. And as per our other article, inflation is a sustained increase in price levels over a period of time. Did you have a serious question? DOR (HK) (talk) 16:52, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
If he does, it will be his first. --Jayron32 17:41, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes but when I see fiction I sometimes notice someone could've used their powers or plot device or wish quota to make gold, transmute to it or duplicate anything. And then wonder if the laws are broadly worded enough to cover that (whether by wording any prohibition as broadly as possible out of habit or just accidentally having a certain word choice (i.e. the definitions section of a gold sale law says "gold is a mineral of the atomic number 79" and mineral had an official definition in that jurisdiction that says it's a natural resource that.. which accidentally explicitly excludes supernatural gold) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
And inflation may not be the correct economic term for increasing the amount of gold in circulation (obviously only by mining/recovery or possibly nuclear physics in this universe) but doing that doesn't help the commodity's purchasing power/trading power, just like counterfeiting. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:17, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Anglicizing New Testament names

Why are New Testament names Anglicized? Why is Yeshua translated as Jesus (in English and "Hay-seus" in Spanish)? Why are the names of Yeshua's Disciples Anglicized (except Judas, who was a "bad guy"). Finally, what would the correct (non-Anglicized) names of the Disciples be? 69.42.176.50 (talk) 17:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

The translation of names into other languages goes back to the writing of the bible itself, and carries on through every translation into every language. English is not special in this regard. The original New Testament was written mostly in Koine Greek, and the original authors used the name Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (transliterated Iesous Christos) and not the Aramaic words Jesus and is disciples would have spoken amongst themselves. Wikipedia has an article titled Names and titles of Jesus in the New Testament if you want to get deep into the weeds on this one. The notion of preserving the original pronunciation and spelling of a name, rather than translating it, is a relatively new concept; certainly not much older than a hundred years, which is why English language texts about historical figures tend to use English names for them, while modern figures we tend to preserve their name; that's why the Dutch king is named Willem-Alexander, whereas his great-great-grandfather is known in English as William III. The reason why this was done with names in the New Testament is because this is what has always been done, by every language, in all of history, until very recently. --Jayron32 17:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Also, regarding the last question, on the original names of his disciples (by whom I presume you mean the 12 Apostles), the original Aramaic and/or Hebrew names (where known) are listed in the first line of every Wikipedia article on them, for example Simon Peter was called ܫܸܡܥܘܿܢ ܟܹ݁ܐܦ݂ܵܐ or Shemayon Keppa (Keppa is related to Cephas, which is also sometimes used in some parts of the New Testament alongside Petros) Just go to each Wikipedia article, and each will tell you the original names, both the Aramaic name and the Koine Greek name. --Jayron32 17:51, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks. I should have known the information was already here! 69.42.176.50 (talk) 19:06, 24 May 2018 (UTC)69.42.176.50 (talk) 19:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)