Humanities desk
< February 10	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 12 >

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

February 11

Identify this WWII fighter

File:Demi-unidentified-aircraft.jpg

Unfortunately, the resolution of these photos (other views) is dreadful, but hopefully someone can help me identify this airplane. It's parked at my local airport, and I'm curious about it. It looks like a Zero to me, except the wings have an inverted gull-wing shape. I've found some references to a carrier prototype Ka-14 with the inverted gull-wing shape, but I find it hard to believe such a thing would be sitting around a small airport in Southern Oregon, is it something else altogether? Why Humanities? Seems like a historical question as much as anything else. Demi ^T/_C 07:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a poser, isn't it? From the big red star on the side, you'd think it was a Soviet plane, or possibly Chinese, but I can't find any indication that China had fighters. I've looked at every Russian fighter I could find a picture of, and the thing that's throwing everything off is that square, blocky tail and the elongated cockpit. The Zeros I've found all have rounded tops to the tail and more of a slant, and the gullwing dosn't seem right... not to mention the length of the plane seems odd as well. I'm thoroughly stumped, at this point. Tony Fox (arf!) 07:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks similar to the Sukhoi Su-2 or the Sukhoi Su-3. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 08:31, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Got it~~, The moment I saw this one it looked familiar. It is not a Soviet Fighter but a modified PZL TS-8 Bies a polish trainer aircraft used from 1957 to 1970s. It can be easily identified by it's wheels unsuitable for grass airfields but characteristic for jet aircraft. The two-man cabin, the undercarriage, the shape of the wings and of the tail or are the same as in the PZL Bies (Devil), the air intake can be easily modiffied to look more impressing. A trainer aircraft should be easy to handle and have cheap operating costs so it makes a great war bird. And a soviet red star is more impessing than the markings of the Polish or Indonesian Air Force. In the late 1970's and early 1980's if you had USDs (taking into account the USD/PLZ currency exchange rate at that time) you could probably buy a ex-military Ts-8 for the price of scrap metal, so no wonder someone tried to turn it into a much more prestigious "WWII Soviet Fighter". Mieciu K 15:11, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correction it is not a PZL TS-8 Bies although it looks very similar but judging from the chinese inscriptions on the fuel filler cap it is a licensed copy of the Yakovlev Yak-18A a Nanchang CJ-6 Mieciu K 15:38, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, guys, thanks everyone! Demi ^T/_C 05:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Damn! You guys are good!Edison 06:14, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

burberry logo

When did Burberry change from Burberrys, and from when has the logo been stitched into its products?Ardans 08:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SAT Scores Required To Get Into A Top US College

Hey there. I am a high school student studying in Pakistan, and would like to get into one of the top 10 US colleges. My preferred choices include the likes of Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, Caltech, Ann Arbour etc. After browsing through their respective sites, I found that the only way I could get admission is by taking the SAT. My question is, what score should I aim for out of 2400? Is 2000 good enough, or should I be aiming higher? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

hasanclkHasanclk 11:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This site should give you a general idea of the scores that people who get into these schools are getting. Keep in mind that SAT scores are only one of many things they look at -- GPA, essays, activities, etc. are also important. A perfect score is no guarantee of admission (and a relatively low score is no guarantee of rejection). Dave6 ^talk 11:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The traditional test had a verbal which went to 800 and a math which went to 800 for a 1600 max. Have they added a third test? The elite U.S. colleges have for years taken pride in rejecting students who got perfect math and verbal scores, and were high school valedictorians. But different students may be judged by different standards. Edison 06:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. The SAT has been heavily revised in recent years, including the addition of a third section. It's not the same test we took in our youths. --Diderot 15:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So what can I actually do to better my chances of getting into a college? 203.135.47.220 13:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I could give you some easy answer. The most effective way to improve your SAT score is to go back in time and make sure you were born into a rich anglophone family in an industrialized country, preferably a family involved in a trade that demands an advanced education and that is prepared to send you to a private college prep school. The test is known to heavily favor people from that background. Failing that, there are cram schools in the US that produce moderate score improvements. There are SAT study books that aren't too bad, but their effectiveness is debatable. Mastery of a very high level of English is essential, even for the nominally nonverbal sections.

Of course, many foreign students cheat. There are several ways to go about this, but the College Board has been cracking down a lot lately.

Admissions at elite American universities is fickle and often random, but not random enough to be equitable. Outside the SATs, at some schools participation in community service, school government and other extra-curricular activities is a major boon to admissions. At others, it's seen as the kind of crap people do just to get into a good college. Excellent grades and recommendations will make some difference, but you can be sure that most other applicants will also have excellent grades and recommendations. Alumni recommendations used to help quite a lot, but there's been a crackdown lately. Being a top athlete will open doors, even at schools that claim that it doesn't. It helps enormously to be physically attractive and have good elocution skills if you make it to the interview stage. Knowledge of a musical instrument is more helpful than it sounds. Fluency in major world languages is a huge boon, as most young Americans, even those in top schools, have no foreign language abilities whatsoever.

This all still may not help you. Many top schools in the US impose quotas - either explicit or implicit - on the admission of foriegn students to undergraduate programs. Graduate programs are usually less restrictive, but as a foreign student applying to a top US university as an undergrad, you may well be held to a higher standard than American students.

I'd like try to talk you out of applying to an American elite university for an undergrad education, as they are often quite rotten places to be when compared to the relatively relaxed environments at second tier schools. If you have the talent to take advantage of an Ivy League education, you have enough talent to take better advantage of it in the form of a Master's degree. Good university grades, good GREs and good recommendations from professors are far more likely to lead to admission to an elite Master's after a solid second tier education than the same high school qualifications.

But when I was in your shoes, I didn't want to hear that either. --Diderot 15:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second, third, ....nth tier schools are also often just as rotten as the previous poster says the top tier schools are. Less selective private schools are delighted to charge the same tuition while offering fewer chances to get top jobs on graduation or to gain admittance to the most selective graduate and professional schools, to get recommendations from top professors,and to lack the career-long networking of grads from the top schools. Of course there are many less selective schools which offer a fine education, and more interaction with their less famous professors. Cognitive dissonance may explain the feeling that the college we can get into is better than the one which rejected us, just as the grapes we can't reach are probably sour anyway. Edison 16:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not come to Canada? The tuition is cheaper and the G13 Universities are comparable to the colleges you mentioned. Best of all, you are less likely to be accused of being a terrorist! Whammy, blammy, wowee-zowee! − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 05:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And in many provinces, they're not allowed to judge you on your extra-curricular activities. It's written right into the Education Act of some provinces. Test results, grades in your final two years, and your entry essay are all that are allowed to count. (This is mainly because in some provinces a large minority of students come from small to tiny communities that simply don't have any extracurricular activities. Basing university enrollment on such activities is considered discriminatory against people who live outside major communities.) --Charlene 11:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

People are deleting posts here!

I´m really sorry to say that, but look at this link and you will see another user deleting posts. I find it repulsive. Could someone please revert it? (even though it wont revert the sick mind which does these things, erasing posts which they don´t like) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities&diff=next&oldid=107148410 A.Z. 13:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The post is back. That´s really weird. If you click on the link and then click Older Edit, you´ll see the Arab Immigrants post was gone... A.Z. 13:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What should I do if I think there´s some fundamentalist Jew on Wikipedia erasing things about Arab people and about the relation between Jews and money? A.Z. 14:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See: Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes and Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes#First_step:_Talk_to_the_other_parties_involved

That deletion is currently being discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Reference_desk#question_about_jews

You should try there first, if that fails you should ask about complaining - one place to ask about how to make a complaint is Wikipedia:Help desk 87.102.9.15 14:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A.Z., your post is unclear. Could you perhaps clarify it? Loomis 04:28, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

english literature

i would like a detailed analasys of chaucer;s general prologue —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.162.175.83 (talk • contribs)

Have you read General Prologue and the links therefrom? That should give you a good start.--Shantavira 17:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Legally Kicking People

From the eggshell skull article:

In 1891, the Wisconsin Supreme Court came to a similar result in Vosburg v. Putney, 80 Wis. 523, 50 N.W. 403 (Wis., 1891) (reversed and remanded for a new trial on other grounds). In that case, an eleven year-old boy kicked a 14 year-old boy in the shin while at school. It turned out that the 14 year-old was recovering from a previous injury. The kick resulted in the boy entirely losing the use of his leg. No one could have predicted the level of injury before the kicking. Nevertheless, the court found that since the kicking was unlawful, as it occurred during school and not on the playground, the 11 year-old boy was liable for the injury.

Does this mean to say that had the assault occured on the playground, it would have been quite okay? --Seans Potato Business 18:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Court is simply implying that a certain amount of playground horseplay is by its very essence not unlawful. Kids are going to get a little rough on the playground, and subjecting them to liability for it doesn't seem to serve a viable societal goal. Something more serious, such as punching another kid in the face, would probably be found unlawful, whether it was on the playground or not. GreatManTheory 19:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What if you're wearing a mask? ;D — Kieff | Talk 19:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would depend on how cool it was. (Glad to see someone remembers this) - AMP'd 23:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's this mask thing in reference to? --Seans Potato Business 05:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's been some oddball a while back who repeatedly asked if it was okay to commit various crimes if the perpetrator wore a mask. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In effect, an old reference desk in-joke. 惑乱分からん 15:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issue isn't kicking, but physical aggression. One might accidentally touch someone, even with a foot. Accidents are generally not prosecuted. MacGyver doesn't know it, but my dad knew what my knickname would become when he named me DDBall :D The joke is funnier (for me) because there were many oddballs of the past who believed that what occurred in the dark was not seen by god. One strange expression of the belief resulted in successive newly installed popes sitting in a chair where they were groped so as to ascertain that they were male. The chair had a hole in the middle (it exists!) and a curtain skirting. DDB 11:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What if he had kicked a seagull? Or contrariwise?Edison 06:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]