Humanities desk
< March 18	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 20 >

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

March 19

Legal definition

I need the true definition for Residential Entry supposedly a class"A" misdemeanor? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.46.70.231 (talk) 02:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I imagine this depends on which country/city/state etc that you are talking about. - Akamad 04:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the state of Indiana, residential entry appears to be a Class D felony.[1] We can't give legal advice here, but perhaps it is time to find a lawyer. --Lambiam ^Talk 10:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

copyright information for the article Micheangelo

I need help finding the copyright information and author of the article Michelangelo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelangelo the article consists of 10 pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.240.63.109 (talk) 02:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The article is released in the GFDL. You will find the authors under this history tab. Picaroon 02:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GFDL link, if you want to learn more. That said, if you are asking for this information in order to cite the article for a paper or school project, note that Wikipedia articles have no "author" for citation information, and have a copyright date as of their last edit; this and the other citation information you need can be easily found by clicking on the "cite this page" link to the left of any Wikipedia article. Jfarber 02:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics on educational attainment in the US

Wikipedia has three articles representing two sets of data which seem to contradict each other about the educational attainment of different demographic groups in the US.

The first set of data is located in two articles, and cites "Logan & Dean" (without a more detailed footnote) as well as [2]. It is based on 2000 Census data

The second set of data is from a census link [3] and is based on 2003 Census data

Educational attainment in the United States#Race

The data seem starkly different. Do they in fact contradict each other? If so, which one is right?

--JianLi 04:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to tell, but I note that one set of data refers specifically to "Black immigrants from africa", while the other refers to "non-native born african americans." These are not the same group, though there is some overlap; the latter group would include, for example, anyone of african ancestry who had immigrated to the US from Canada, the UK, or any number of other countries; the former would seem to only include people who are both racially African and originally from Africa themselves. It is thus possible that both sets of data are correct. Knowing how much those two data sets DO in fact overlap, and what they otherwise comprise, would help us know more. Jfarber 04:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've not looked at the references, but you should be aware that educational research is not without controversy. In NSW, we give kids a SNAP test in years 7 and 8 to test numeracy, also an ELLA test to test literacy. Both tests overlap and the reason why they are run is because State authorities own one test, while federal authorities own the other. The results influence funding, and no one trusts others to run tests independantly where funding is concerned. Schools are placed in the awkward position of wanting year 7 to do badly, and year 8 to do well, suggesting school induced improvement. Similaraly, in the early '80s, Ronald Reagan spent big on education after a report suggesting a decline in achievement. However, further analysis showed every single ethnic subgrouping had improved in achievement. The reason for the apparent contradiction stemmed from more poorly achieving ethnic subgroupings comprising a larger percentage of candidates providing later results. DDB 07:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Music of the holocaust and other

I am doing a powerpoint presentation on the book Maus by Art Spiegalman. I was wondering if anyone knows where I can get some music of the holocaust from the camps. Also, I need some music that would illustrate the internal struggle of the author trying to write about the holocaust.

Thanks, and this is only a small part, so you wouldn't be doing the work for me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.130.41.63 (talk) 04:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

How serendipitous! Italian composer Francesco Lotoro has recently compiled an archive of music written by prisoners of war from WWII. Hopefully there will be quite a bit written by Holocaust POWs. Check out this Associated Press news story. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 04:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is quite a lot of information that you can access on this question. In the first instance you should look here [4] and here [5]. My favourite piece of music that deals with the subject of Nazi persecution of the Jews is A Child of Our Time, an oratorio by the English composer Sir Michael Tippet. It was written as a response to Kristallnacht, and makes effective use of negro spirituals, first and foremost in musical terms, but also linking the persecution of the Jews with earlier forms of injustice. It's very moving. Clio the Muse 06:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The movie Everything is Illuminated might have some food for thought, as well as this. DDB 07:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can also try the music composed by pianist Władysław Szpilman, whose story of astonishing good fortune in surviving The Holocaust by hiding in occupied Warsaw was the subject of the 2002 film The Pianist (film) --Dweller 13:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For music within the camps per se, check what might be mentioned in Fania Fénelon's Playing for Time and the film based on her book. Though there's some question as to whether the Theresienstadt ghetto had the characteristics of a concentration camp, it was the source of original music such as Brundibár and other compositions created and performed there. The deportations as a theme is featured in the evocative "Different Trains" by contemporary composer Steve Reich, recorded by the Kronos Quartet. (Oh, and depending on the purpose and intended distribution of your presentation, be sure to check into usage rights). -- Deborahjay 19:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly away from the holocaust per se, but not entirely unrelated, Olivier Messiaen's Quartet for the End of Time was written in a POW camp while he was imprisoned by the Germans in WW2. JackofOz 03:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably the most famous composer to die at Auschwitz was Viktor Ullmann; some of his works are available, many of which he wrote while held at Terezín. Other composers murdered by the Nazis include Dawid Ajzensztadt, Dawid Beigelman , Vladimir Durmashkin,Mordechai Gebirtig, Israel and Jakub Glatstein, Jósef Koffler, Joachim Mendelson, Marian Neuteich, Nochem Shternheim, and Izrael Szajewicz. You may wish you use the song by Hirsh Glik, "Never say you have reached the very end" ("Zog nit keynmol az du geyst dem letstn veg") which became a powerful unifying song during the Warsaw uprising, if I remember correctly. Martin Gilbert titles a chapter after it in his history of the Holocaust; I've heard it sung. There is a complete collection of songs of the Holocaust period by a survivor of the war, Shmerke Kaczerginski, who escaped from the Vilna ghetto and was able to join the Jewish underground resistance movement. He died in 1954 and published a collection, all in Yiddish, entitled Lider fun di getos un lagern (songs of the ghettos and camps). Looks like we do not have a Music of the Holocaust article, and indeed these redlinks could use some attention.

There is a lot of music by others about the period, of course: the Symphony No. 3 (Górecki) is extremely famous, but other music includes the Dies Irae of Krzysztof Penderecki (aka the "Auschwitz Oratorio"), Arnold Schoenberg's Survivor from Warsaw, the marvelous and intensely moving oratorio by Tippett which Clio mentioned above, and it's hard not to be tempted by the ethereal beauty of some of the Messaien. Antandrus (talk) 05:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of posting Antandrus's valuable information and observation regarding WP's lack thereof at WP:JH. ---Sluzzelin talk 08:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Art Siegelman said he listened to a 30s choir called The Comedian Harmonists during the drawing of Maus. Rhinoracer 15:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a palace or some such thing

Where is this place? Link: http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/4499/untitledin4.jpg --Seans Potato Business 06:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I´d ask this question on this site [6]. A.Z. 07:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's the magnificent Château de Chambord in the Loire Valley of France, built for Francis I as a hunting lodge. Work started in 1519 and was completed in 1547. Leonardo da Vinci is reputed to have been involved in its design. When it was nearing completion Francis showed it to the Emperor Charles V, his old enemy, in what has to be one of the greatest examples of one-upmanship in all of history! Clio the Muse 08:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask how did you become aware of that? I actually spent some time trying to find out what castle it was. I didn´t find anything on the Internet, though. A.Z. 09:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know the Loire Valley quite well, having spent some wonderful summers there when I was a little girl. For me Chambord was the palace of the Beast, and I kept expecting to see him and Beauty walking in the garden together! Clio the Muse 09:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Clio, that's great! Seans Potato Business 16:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone once described the turreted roof of the place as looking like a game of chess, or words to that effect. --Anonymous, March 20, 2007, 18:35 (UTC).

Probability of future human existence

I read a feature article (don't recall where, when) where the writer uses statistical hypothesis about the survival of other species to estimate how long the human civilization is expected to survive. So, I am looking for theorists/statisticians who have done this work and to see how they made their estimates. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.189.150.48 (talk) 07:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It's called the Doomsday argument, and as I recall Mr. Mark Twain had something interesting to say on this type of reasoning.--Pharos 08:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the survival of other species is relevant to our own survival, as technology both gives us opportunities to survive things which would kill other species and allows us to endanger our species in ways no other species can. Whether our technology allows humans to spread to other planets, solar systems, etc., faster than our destructive weapons technology grows is the real test. If we get to a point where thousands of people have to ability to each wipe out humanity single-handedly, then we won't survive. Limiting the spread of nuclear weapons is thus absolutely critical to our survival. StuRat 15:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, "signs point to 'no'". The rate of technological advance is so enormous, and increasing so quickly, that individuals will have enormous powers of destruction in just a few short decades (genetic engineering, laser-based nuclear enrichment, etc.). Any off-Earth colonization going on at that point, which doesn't seem very likely at all, will be very fragile in comparison. --TotoBaggins 00:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be greater energy devoted to finding ways to end human life than to finding ways to enhance and prolong it. This bodes ill for the long term survival of the species. I see unintended consequences of nanotechnology, robotics, genetic engineering, and biological warfare as a greater menace than global warming, terrorism, pollution, guns or bombs. Edison 04:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How far in the future? Human existence is likely to continue for the foreseeable future (barring a freak cosmic incident like a black hole destroying earth). Civilization, however, is far more fragile. An asteroid strike, nuclear war, etc. would leave many survivors, but would damage or destroy the infrastructure of civilization. Undeveloped areas of South America, New Zealand, and possibly parts of Central America would likely go on as normal.

Gibbon's remarks on the prophet Muhammed

In his Decline and Fall, Edward Gibbon makes numerous comments about the prophet Muhammed. Is he factually accurate in this regard? Are there any reputable Muslim apologists who have defended the prophet against his accusations? The Mad Echidna 17:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have specific 'accusations' in mind? Gibbon was first and foremost a historian, one that engages too closely with his subject, perhaps, for contemporary taste, but a remarkable one nontheless. He could be highly critical of the impact of forms of religious belief on civil society, and the contribution they made to the corruption of the perfect ideal of the Roman state, so much so that Decline and Fall was placed on the list of banned books by the Catholic Church. He says many things about the Prophet, which I dare say that Muslim scholars would object to; but it is not all accustion, and he looks at Muhammed's life from the point of view of a historian, not a Christian polemicist. I have a copy of the Decline and Fall in front of me, in the 1978 reprint of the six volume Everyman edition, first published in 1910. Gibbon's remarks are too lengthy to quote in full, but here is some of his summation of Muhammed's life from volume five, pages 273-4:

The author of a mighty revolution appears to have been endowed with a pious and contemplative disposition: so soon as marriage had raised him above the pressure of want, he avoided the paths of ambition and avarice; and till the age of forty he lived in innocence, and would have died withut a name. The unity of God was an idea most congenial to nature and reason; and a slight conversation with the Jews and the Christians would teach him to despise and detest the idolatry of Mecca. It was the duty of a man and a citizen to impart the doctrine of salvation, and to rescue his country from the dominion of sin and error. The energy of a mind incessantly bent on the same object would convert a general obligation into a particular call; the warm suggestions of the understanding or the fancy would be felt as he inspiration of Heaven; the labour of the thought would expire in rapture and vision; and the inward sensation, the invisible monitor, would be described with the forms and the attributes of an angel of God...Charity may believe that the original motives of Mohammed were those of pure and genuine benevolence; but the human misssionary is incapable of cherising the obstinate unbelievers who reject his claims, despise his arguments, and persecute his life; he might forgive his personal adversaries, he may lawfully hate the enemies of God; the stern passions of pride and revenge were kindled in the bosom of Muhammed, and he sighed, like the prophet of Nineveh, for the destruction of the rebels whom he had condemned.

This is fairly typical of Gibbon, and there are indeed more critical passages; but there is nothing that bears any similarity to 'Show me just what Muhammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman...' There may be much in Gibbon with which Muslims would take issue; but he makes a sincere attempt to be honest in his judgements and scrupulous in his facts. Clio the Muse 20:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Clio, but you have mistaken my question, and ended up with apologetics for Gibbon, which are unnecessary here. I'm a Gibbon fan, and as you say, he takes great pains to be accurate and just in his appraisals. This is exactly why his accusations, and they are exactly that, are worth looking into for a believer in the Prophet. I'm a Baha'i, and belief in what we call the Manifestations of God is one of our most fundamental tenets. Hence for Baha'i apologetics, it is worth situating oneself in relation to credible skeptics like Gibbon.

The accusations start about where your quote ends, because as you state, you have not selected the cream of his attack. It really gets going here: A philosopher will observe ...that his conscience would be soothed by the persuasion, that he alone was absolved by the Deity from the obligation of positive and moral laws. and ...in his private conduct, Mahomet indulged the appetites of a man, and abused the claims of a prophet. A special revelation dispensed him from the laws which he had imposed on his nation; the female sex, without reserve, was abandoned to his desires... (from the same paragraph as your quote, and the one following). This is something that would surely raise the ire of the average Muslim, and need a reply, so I expect there must be something out there. The Mad Echidna 23:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are quite right, Echidna (I can't call you Mad!), and I did say there were more critical passages; but overall he attempts to be fair to his subject, which is worthy of mention in itself, considering the attitudes of his time. The thrust of your question was unclear to me, so I did feel some apologetics were necessary, not for you, obviously, but for a wider audience. The passage you quote would indeed be viewed with disfavour; but so, I suspect, would mine. But I honestly do not believe that the arguments of an eighteenth century historian, even one as enduring as Gibbon, carry weight, or have every carried weight, in the Muslim world. As far as those particular remarks are concerned you would really have to draw on his sources for a true test of credibility. Clio the Muse 23:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where Gibbon editorializes on the life of Muhammad, declares his intention to "balance his faults and virtues" and "decide whether the title of enthusiast or impostor more properly belongs to that extraordinary man", it might be worthwhile to examine the sources he had available and the context in which the work was produced. In Islam and the West, Bernard Lewis details the difficulties faced by eighteenth-century scholars—difficulties which impacted Gibbon's work—especially the "attempts to present Muhammad and Islam in terms of current controversies in Christendom":

The honor and reputation of Islam and its founder were protected in Europe neither by social pressure nor by legal sanction, and they thus served as an admirable vehicle for anti-religious and anti-Christian polemic. Gibbon occasionally accomplishes this purpose by attacking Islam while meaning Christianity, more frequently by praising Islam as an oblique criticism of Christian usage, belief, and practice. Much of his praise would not be acceptable in a Muslim country.(p. 96)

Though Lewis is not a "Muslim apologist", if that is really what you are trying to find.—eric 20:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Starbucks Gift Card

If I buy a starbucks giftcard at one store and use it at another, which specifically profits from my transactions? 172.191.88.24 18:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I couldn't find anything on the Starbucks site about this. Perhaps a starbucks franchisee might be able to answer this accurately but I would expect it to work like this: If you buy a $10 giftcard that $10 goes to the individual starbucks you bought it in. When you buy a drink in another store (using the card) they will receive nothing. I suspect that over the period of a year this would 'even out' and that any more formal arrangement could potentially be more costly to work out than is worthwhile. I wouldn't say this with any authority but that is how it would seem best to do it in my mind (you could for instance have the coffee-serving firm charge annually the other firms that sold the giftcard for the cost of the coffee production). ny156uk 19:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try a search on "gift card accounting," the rules and procedures for which can vary from state to state and company to company. I'm not personally familiar with SBUX policy. [7][8][9]. dr.ef.tymac 19:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up: Just to clarify with an example, ZZZ corp. can distribute and sell gift cards through its franchisees. For every gift card sold, ZZZ corp. gets a cut and so does the individual store. ZZZ may get $8 and the store may get $2 for every $10 gift card sold at that store. When a customer redeems that card at a store (regardless of which one) ZZZ corp then reimburses that specific store accordingly. You may ask yourself, "how can they make money with this arrangement?" Easy, lots of cards never get redeemed, and even the ones that do can be seen as a Loyalty Marketing expense. HTH. dr.ef.tymac 19:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Starbucks is not franchised. In general, a Starbucks store is owned by the company, not by any individual franchisee. Sometimes you will see a Starbucks location within a hotel that is owned and operated by the hotel, not Starbucks Corp. (you can often tell because the baristas wear hotel name tags). The same thing goes for Starbucks outlets within department stores and grocery stores (see Starbucks#Stores). The question I have about Starbucks cards is how they deal with different currencies. For example, suppose I buy a Starbucks card in Canada for $100 CAD, then I take it to the United States and make purchases at Starbucks totalling $60 USD, and then I add $60 USD back to the card. Then I bring the card back to Canada. Assuming that the interbank CAD/USD exchange rate has remained constant at all relevant times, will a Starbucks in Canada read my card as having a balance of exactly $100 CAD? --Mathew5000 14:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merchant Navy spiteful in WWI?

Where Merchant Navy officers angry in World War One when the Admiralty chose to take control of their ships? If so, or even if not, could you provide a quote either way? Thanks. Computerjoe 's talk 20:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Computerjoe, the Admiralty did not 'take control' of merchant ships in the First World War. If you are referring specifically to the convoy system, that was not introduced until 1917 on the suggestion of David Lloyd George, the Prime Minister, during the second phase of the German unrestricted U-Boat campaign. The Admiralty had been reluctant to embrace this tactic; and even at the height of greatest peril it was not made compulsory for private vessels to join naval convoys, and some continued to run the risk entailed in free-lance operations. However, fully protected convoys greatly reduced losses in merchant tonnage, which obviously had a clear appeal to ship owners. Individual captains may have been frustrated by the slow pace of convoys, which compelled all vessels to travel at the same rate; but even for them the advantages must have been obvious, especially as convoy losses amounted to 2%, compared with 10% for unaccompanied ships. Clio the Muse 21:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weren't some changed into troop transports? Computerjoe 's talk 21:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; but only the fastest and, as far as I am aware, with the full co-operation of the owners. Indeed, the Cunard line built the Lusitania and Mauritania, with the supplementary aim that they could be fitted out, if needs be, for wartime service. For this they received generous loan provisions from the British government. A month after the outbreak of war in August 1914 the Cunard ledger shows that the Lusitania was enrolled as an armed auxiliary cruiser. It was allowed to continue on civilian duty for the time being; but her sisters, the Mauritania and the Aquitania, went straight into service with the Royal Navy. Clio the Muse 21:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Were their skippers Royal Navy, RNR or Merchant? Please could you find any quote made by their crews/owners. Thanks. Computerjoe 's talk 22:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Computerjoe, I think the skippers and crew were seconded to the Royal Navy from the Merchant Marine, but I cannot be absolutely certain about this. It would seem to make sense that such large vessals continued to be managed by those who knew them best. However, I would suggest that you have a look at The Cross of Sacrifice: Officers, Men and Women of the Merchant Navy and the Mercantile Fleet Auxiliary, 1914-1919 v.5 by S. D. Jarvis and D. B. Jarvis, published by the Naval and Military Press. I do not have a copy of this book to hand, so am unable to search for the specific information you are looking for. On Cunard there is Atlantic Liners of the Cunard Line from 1884 to the Present Day by Neil McArt, published by Patrick Stephens Ltd. It really depends how serious you are about this topic, but there is also a lot of information in the relevant editions of Jane's Fighting Ships and The Merchant Navy by Archibald Hurd, published in three volumes in London by John Murray Ltd. between 1921 and 1929. This is the official history of the arm during the First World War. You would obviously have to look this out in a good research library. Unfortunately, I cannot locate the kind of quotations you are looking for. Clio the Muse 23:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]