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.
Is there any where I can find statistics on the number of Americans that die annually or in any given year because they were denied coverage for medicine or treatments they couldn't afford?
(I apologize if this wasn't the right place to ask - but Humanities includes society so I figured this would be a better place to ask than science)
Thanks to a city ordinance I just can't go around throwing a parade whenever I want one, because -(insert mocking whiny voice here) "I need a per-mit". Please tell me what the legal definition of a parade is so I can figure a way around this unjust draconian law. I figure it's something along the lines of "when 5 or more people moving in unison are playing a trumpet...". That being the case, as long as it's not nighttime, and as long as I'm not blocking traffic, then there's no reason why I (one person) can't legally walk down my street playing a bass drum! And what if I pick up a second person who walks in step directly behind me doing a wavelike motion? Will I get cited then? What is the line where "paradelike" becomes "parade"?--Hey, I'm Just Curious (talk) 00:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Given that you are asking how not to get in trouble for breaking the law, this sounds a lot like legal advice. So we can't really help. - EronTalk00:05, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not interested in breaking the law, merely getting around it. I realize this skirts around legal advice, that's why I only asked for the definition. And once I know what that definition is, believe me, I'll have no trouble finding a loophole! Can't fight city hall, huh? You dont know me very well!... --Hey, I'm Just Curious (talk) 00:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In all likelihood any such definiton will be specific to your municipality. Parades, noise parameters and the like are often controlled by way of city ordinances. Try the web site for your city hall. ៛ Bielle (talk) 00:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My hunch is that your jurisdiction, like the county I live in and the nearby towns, has created its regulations, among other reasons, to manage traffic flow and moderate noise. Your jurisdiction, and some of your fellow citizens, may not find it all that draconian to keep people from walking in the middle of the street rather than on sidewalks, nor to keep people from banging on drums because they happen to have them lying around. Nearby Washington DC (which has a regulation or two on its books), the permit process has allowed everybody from the American Nazi Party to the United Knights of the Ku Klux Klan (not a group with many DC members) to the Million Man March to the annual March for Life to people who like wearing green on St. Patrick's Day to parade. They tend not to want folks tramping in the middle of Fourteenth Street NW at 5 p.m. on a work day, though. OtherDave (talk) 01:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. You haven't even specified what country you live in so there is no chance we can help you. (Don't take this as in invitation to specify precisely where you live because even with that information, it is unlikely any contributor will know about your specific municipality so it is far better if you see a lawyer or look into the law yourself) Nil Einne (talk) 09:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Look at it this way. There are good reasons not to let people block the street or create disruptions. But this obviously needs to be balanced with a right for free assembly. Permits are one approach to having an organized, systematic approach to negotiating these different pressures. They no doubt draw the line arbitrarily (which, in the end, is the only way it can be drawn). But the regulations are straightforward in the sense that anyone can look them up and know more or less what to expect. Draconian? Hardly. It's the same fundamental procedure that lies at the heart of any reasonable civic interaction of rights. That's the old inevitable problem: the more rights you have, the poorer things are going to run, because you're going to be negotiating the overlaps every five minutes. The less rights you have, the more Draconian your system, the more swiftly it dashes along a predetermined path, trains-run-on-time style. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It also have to do with notability of your cause. People in San Francisco will kick the crap out of protestors in the street if they do a sit in. Blocking their Priuses is NOT ok. Unless they don't completely disagree with the message. If they agree with the cause they will use their Priuses to block “the man”. Prius = liberal swiss army knife. --mboverload@02:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Um, actually I don't think notability (in the general sense or the Wikipedia sense) has anything to do with it. And I doubt anyone will "kick the crap" out of protesters—they'll just get them arrested. At best. (In fact, I've seen many disruptive protests in the East Bay that weren't with permits. The police tolerated them because they "couldn't do anything about them", as they told me. It is not really in anyone's interest to start knocking in people's heads—especially if you disagree with the protesters. There's no better way to shoot yourself in the foot than to unambiguously cede moral authority.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The legal definition of a parade should be specified either in the "definitions" section of your city code or in the case law. Consult a lawyer or your local law library. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 11:51, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to find out the name of a picture book I read as a child during the 1990s. The illustrations were realistic, reminiscent of Jan Brett's style in The Mitten (without any snow). What I recall of the storyline goes like this:
Some children are kidnapped by a troll (or other magical antagonist) away from their mother. The mother goes to find them and arrives at the troll's door to get them back. He insists that her feet are too dirty and that she cut them off before she may enter. She pretends to cut off her feet and walks on her knees (she's wearing a dress) to get in. But the troll has turned all of the children into food and she must guess which child is which food item before she can get them back.
I have a distant, distant ancestor, Joran Persson, who played a small but significant part in a power struggle in Sweden in the mid 1500s. According to records my mother received from a Swedish genealogist years ago, Joran's mother was killed right around the same time as Joran was--allegedly because she had been accused and convicted of witchcraft. I'm not sure this is true, but certainly there would have been political motivation to go after her, I suppose. Our article suggests that she was scheduled to be executed with him and killed herself...perhaps the witchcraft charge is invented history, but of course it may be the charge that would have warranted her execution. My question--were there witch trials in Sweden as early as the 1560s? If so, where would I find records of them? I know that, even if records exist, they're probably in Swedish and in archives not web-accessible, but I thought I'd see what I could get from the good folk at the RD first. Thanks for whatever you can provide! User:Jwrosenzweig editing as 71.112.40.194 (talk) 07:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, it looks like I never realized there was an article on her at Anna (d.1568). I'm still interested in the question about witch trials, but it looks like there are more answers available on the web than I'd thought. 71.112.40.194 (talk) 07:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was under the distinct impression that witch trials are a popular myth that there has very little evidence to suggest they ever really occured. Still i'll defer to other's knowledge in this case 194.221.133.226 (talk) 13:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Given how potent a brew you can make with ignorance, gullibility, and fanaticism, I'd hesitate to dismiss the notion of witch hunts, though many probably lacked the dubious benefit of a trial. Any number of people have used Exodus 22:18 to justify jailing, abusing, and killing others, usually women. I suspect a few have been killed outside the Judeo-Christian world as well. — OtherDave (talk) 21:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
According to various Swedish sites, witch trials didn't occur in Sweden until the 17th century. Apparently, nearly 100 people (men and women) were convicted and killed between 1600 and 1650. In 1668 the real inquisitions began and during the next 8 years another 300 people were killed. The last time anyone was killed for witchcraft was in 1704. It therefore seems unlikely that your ancestor would have been killed for witchcraft as early as the mid 1500s. (Tigger) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.138.116.230 (talk) 13:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am Swedish myself, and have read a lot about witch trials in Sweden. Of course, they are always a lot of rumors about everything. To summarize the subject of Swedish witch trials: The real witch hunt in Sweden took place in the 1670s, between 1668 and 1676, when around 280 (240 confirmed) people were executed convicted for having kidnapped children to Satan. Everyone exept one were decapitated before they were burned. Outside of the period of 1668-1676, witch trials were uncommon in Sweden; almost all of the witch trials that ever occurred in Sweden took place in the 1670s. They were, however, some isolated cases before 1668; the first woman was executed in 1550, some trials were held by the archbishop in 1597, and a series of them were held in Småland and Östergötland in the 1610s. The last person was executed in 1704. As for your question about Anna, not much seems to be known about her case. Tradition and legend has it, that she was convicted for sorcery, which is accepted by historians, but her case seems unclear. They were no other witch trials held in Sweden in the period 1550-1585. My guess is, that the sorcery charge were a quick excuse to get her out of the way; perhaps she was in fact never formally charged, merely killed, and the charge was added later, because of her reputation. Only a guess! --85.226.235.145 (talk) 10:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What would be the best way for a foreigner to buy shares of stock on an American exchange, NYSE in particular? If through the same channels as an American would do, then what would those channels be? —Bromskloss (talk) 14:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so any recommendations on which one I should turn to? One that is cheap (I don't need consultation or any such extra services) and that can be easily dealt with over the Internet. —Bromskloss (talk) 14:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What country are you in? Barclays bank have a pretty decent service, compare many market makers and work to get the price for your trade. You should not look purely at charges - some places offer cheap order-charges but seem to offer much wider bid offer spreads. How many trades are you looking to do a month, what value of the trades? Answers to these questions will affect who represents good value and who does not. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 15:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks everyone for the answers so far. I'm in Sweden. For the moment, I do not intend to trade much, more like do a one-off transaction, buying into some company and holding it for a long time. —Bromskloss (talk) 19:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is difficult to project the concept that King Arthur was Welsh (Cambrian), and to suggest that accepted Dark Age History is a sham; Wikepedia has itself promulgated concepts that follow the orthodox view. Having spent over ten years researching the subject the conclusions counter much of that which Wikepedia has accepted as fact. As I am about to publish my book 'Arthur: A Dark Age Revisited' it is likely that entrenched opinion will take umbrage at such an upstart challenging entrenched concepts, does Wikepedia take a similar entreched standpoint? [email address redacted] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.133.248 (talk) 17:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
First, it's "Wikipedia" not "Wikepedia"; second, we'll probably only be interested in your book if it receives serious scholarly reviews; third, I don't know who claimed that King Arthur was narrowly Welsh -- he was actually British (the speaker of a "P-Celtic" language, at a time when speakers of P-Celtic were established over a much larger area than Wales). AnonMoos (talk) 23:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Overall, I would say that if your book attains a sufficient degree of notability (either through support or controversy), this will most likely result in a description of that support for or controversy caused by your theory in the King Arthur article. You should understand that like many other publications of a comparable nature, Wikipedia is not so much concerned with what is true as it is with what can be proved to be true and/or has been accepted as true. (Which can be problematic at times, to be sure -- personally, I don't think it's one of the areas where Wikipedia is at its smoothest... but there's a reason for it to be like that.) -- Captain Disdain (talk) 09:29, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed your email, as a precaution against spam. I would guess that it's a reference to a worm gear, in the sense of gears turning, and "things moving along", possibly in the sense of "things coming back around". -- Coneslayer (talk) 18:10, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A google search on the phrase "worm will turn" plus the word "etymology" provides multiple sources saying that it refers to the creature. It may not be able to hurt you, but if you hurt it, it'll turn to face you. --Anonymous, 18:50 UTC, August 14, 2008.
“
Tread on a worm, it turns, sir! If I turn,
Your fault! 'Tis you'll have forced me!
Who's obliged
To give up life yet try no self-defense?
At all events, I'll run the risk, Eh?
”
Tread on a worm and it will turn is listed in Heywood's Proverbs (1546), meaning the lowest of the low, when ill-used, still feel it.—eric19:05, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm surprised no one has yet mentioned Shakespeare, who, even if he didn't originate the phrase, surely helped popularize it. It appears in Clifford's first speech to the King in Act II, Scene ii of Henry VI, Part 3:
My gracious liege, this too much lenity
And harmful pity must be laid aside.
To whom do lions cast their gentle looks?
Not to the beast that would usurp their den.
Whose hand is that the forest bear doth lick?
Not his that spoils her young before her face.
Who scapes the lurking serpent's mortal sting?
Not he that sets his foot upon her back.
The smallest worm will turn, being trodden on,
And doves will peck in safeguard of their brood.
I'd suggest that a worm gear cannot be meant here, and that Browning was likely drawing on his memory of Shakespeare in his quotation. But of course Heywood would seem to suggest that the proverb predates the Bard by a generation or more. User:Jwrosenzweig editing as 71.231.197.110 (talk) 19:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I believe I was in the national gallery of art in Washington DC when I saw a collection of landscape paintings that I liked. In the very center of each one was a very tiny man with a red shirt and blue pants. That is the only real identifying feature of these paintings. Is that enough for anyone to identify who the artist is? -- kainaw™18:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but that isn't him (or her). I've been trying to search at the NGA website, but it appears to be impossible to select "show me pictures of your landscape paintings" there. -- kainaw™18:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why not telephone the gallery and ask them? You can then talk about where in the building the paintings were, as well as what they looked like. --Anonymous, 18:52 UTC, August 14, 2008.
Absolutely! I use that sequence every year to teach my honors U.S. history students about the Hudson School -- very moving. If Cole isn't who you're looking for, kainaw, I'd suggest looking at some of his stuff anyhow, if you like American landscape painters. :-) User:Jwrosenzweig as 71.231.197.110 (talk) 19:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to track it down now by one of the rather unusual landscapes. It was all ice. I figure there aren't many popular landscape paintings of ice. -- kainaw™16:40, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Gildas in his 'De Excidio et conquista Britannia' proclaimed the site from which Picts attacked as far as 'The Wall', he of course wrote in Latin, then scholars by translation and interpretation gave us the name of the site from which the Picts undertook their journey. The only record of that event is that of Gildas and the accepted location is the Cichican Valley, yet in my researches I have failed to find any author who has placed the Cichican Valley on a modern map. Can Wikepedia determine where Cichican was? Can any readers place the Cichican Valley?I know a man who can!
Brian Williams —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.133.248 (talk) 18:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the Korean movie "Chunyang" , the father reminds his son to do the six
exercises of a scholar ,in addition to the preperation for the imperial exam.
What are the six exercises of av scholar and where are they referenced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.75.94 (talk) 20:39, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For further context, the conversation begins with the father saying (English translation), "To master the poetry in a beautiful place is one of the scholar's ways, but then you might fail to balance your body and mind. Don't forget to follow the "six exercises of a scholar", such as archery and horseback riding. Don't forget to do these things." The father then concludes by handing his son a book, saying, "If you get sleepy reading old classics, read this book to stay awake." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cato.a.thompson (talk • contribs) 18:06, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
