Humanities desk
< August 24	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 26 >

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.

August 25

taxing in US and EU for website based in India

we are a website based in India. I dont want to mention the name of the website because this question may be seen as an advertisement. we ask members to read an advertisement and answer question and if the answer is correct, give 2.5 cents to members. We want to launch in USA and European Union while we currently do this in India only. What I want to know is that, after we launch in USA and EU, should we pay tax (say VAT or service tax etc) to US and EU government for the amount of ad revenue collected from US and EU? Or since we have no physical presence in US or EU, are we in no need of paying any taxes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.119.49 (talk) 02:19, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot give legal advice, you will need to speak to a lawyer or accountant. --Tango (talk) 02:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Social Security benefit entitlement for a former, non resident, spouse.

Is a former spouse, of 16 years, that has never resided in the U.S., entitled to a portion of my Social Security benefits? We were married in Canada 16 years ago, and after this marriage I never worked in the U.S. All of my social security credits were earned prior to this marriage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgregor004 (talk • contribs) 03:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This falls under the category of legal advice, so ask a lawyer. DOR (HK) (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer to the question, since I only understand UK benefits entitlement. But, in the UK, it would not be anything like a legal question and few lawyers would know the answer. There are a number of charities expert in benefit entitlement (the Citizens Advice Bureau is one) and they have advisers who could answer the question. I see no reason why someone knowledgeable in US benefits could not answer this. --Phil Holmes (talk) 11:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you would be unable to afford a lawyer, a Legal Aid Society would help; I'd recomment finding an attorney in an area where they likely see a lot of queris from foreigners. Really, this is an area where even random *lawyers* (like myself) wouldn't know the answer very well. (I gather you looked at the Social Security Administration's website and struck out.)Somebody or his brother (talk) 12:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your first port of call should probably be US Social Security. They should be willing to explain to you your wife's entitlement. If it's a grey area a specialist lawyer's opinion may also be worth having. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

General interest question: numbers of ministers in governments

I remember some time ago going through the parliamentary history of Slovenia, and one thing I noticed was that the number of ministers in the first post-independance government (i.e. in 1991) was ridiculously high (22 or 23 of them). The number then started falling and has in the last two or three governenments stabilised at around 12 or 13, which is probably within optimal range for any country. My question(s): does anyone have examples of governments in any country with an unusually high or low number of ministers? What are some of the more unusual ministeries? I remember from my history class that ancient China used to have a ministry of the imperial stable and a ministry of soothsaying. TomorrowTime (talk) 06:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The First Whitlam Ministry in Australia, from 5-19 December 1972, had precisely 2 ministers: Gough Whitlam and his deputy Lance Barnard. But it was always meant to be a short-term arrangement. Whitlam later said: "The Caucus I joined in 1952 had as many Boer War veterans as men who had seen active service in World War II, three from each. The Ministry appointed on 5 December 1972 was composed entirely of ex-servicemen: Lance Barnard and me." -- JackofOz (talk) 08:46, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. If I counted correctly, it was two ministers and 28 ministries... TomorrowTime (talk) 10:44, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in this study, which investigates the optimal number of members in a committee such as a cabinet. It concludes that the fewer members, the better. Committees with more than 20 members are highly inefficient, as well as, for some reason, those with exactly 8. At the time of the study, cabinets existed with every possible number of members between 5 and 34, with the sole exception of 8. 81.98.38.48 (talk) 11:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That got me curious about the U.S., as I knew ours had had 8 at some point. If the Vice President is considered, it was in the 1849-1880s era, and if not, the 1880s to 1913, after Agriculture was added. (At that time, Postmaster General was part of it, and Navy and War were separate.)

That is unusual about 8 being so inefficent. I would have guessed even numbers might be a tad less efficient in general because of the chance of a tie with no tiebreaker.Somebody or his brother (talk) 12:07, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A cabinet is not, in that sense a committee. And efficiency is not as important in a Cabinet as it is in most committees. With a Cabinet the cost of making a wrong decision is extremely high, requiring that lots of people have an input. And the far-reaching consequences of decisions mean that lots of people deserve an input. Plus Cabinets don't actually have to do things - they have civil servants for that. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And in reference to the US, the only vote on the cabinet that matters is that of the president. The cabinet is more an advisory committee. Googlemeister (talk) 14:40, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about Georgian royal succession

I see there two lines of claimants to the Georgian throne: David Bagration of Mukhrani, whose the male agnatic heir of the original Kings of Kartli, Nugzar Bagration-Gruzinsky, who the descendant of the very last King of Georgia, from the junior Kakheti line. Right? But the problem I see with this is what happen to the descendants of Vakhtang VI of Kartli and Jesse of Kartli? I think they still have descendants of the female line left, but didn't medieval Georgia pratice the same succession as the UK where women comes after men, and not exclusion of all women (ie. Tamar of Georgia and Rusudan of Georgia). I found that Vakhtang VI's great-great granddaughter, Princess Anna (1798-1889), married a Count Alexander Petrovich Tolstoy (1801-1873), what happen to their descendants? --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 07:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

will this startup work?

I don't want to name my start-up because that would mean it would be advertising. We are doing a get-paid-for-answering-advertisements thing. members must login, then read three lines of ad text and answer a question based on the above text. if the answer is correct they will get 2.5 cents. will this work in USA? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.96.24.196 (talk) 08:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 10:38, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2.5 cents? Perhaps if your next question is a time travel question, you'll be able to return to a point when 2.5 cents meant something to anyone in the US. I'd say it would be a fairly universal phenomenon for a US panhandlers to throw that back in your face even if you give it to them for free. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 12:34, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And that half-cent could hurt, due to the two pointy corners. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it only me who longs for the days when a good business idea consisted of making something that might improve people's lives, not finding a way to scam money out of big corporations by making people who aren't interested in their products click on their advertisements? DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've stumbled across the real reason the OP doesn't want to name his company. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 14:04, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

will 5 cents work? - the original asker of the question.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.248.69.25 (talk) 14:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you actually expect someone to participate in something they wouldn't otherwise care about, start at a dollar. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 14:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even the government in Canada doesn't look for, or refund, amounts of $2.00 or less. Most of America/ Canada wouldn't change web sites for less that $5.00. Of course, if one can do this over and over, very quickly, and make more than minimum wage (about $10.00 per hour), you might get a taker or two, presuming they believed you about the money. // BL \\ (talk) 15:06, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or offer some tangible benefit, like 5 free iTunes downloads or something like that. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 15:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I expect the pay rate would have to equal minimum wage to be interesting to very many people, unless the questions and text were interesting, or there were the intrinsic reward people get from Sudoku, solitaire, or crosswords. If "answering the question" is just clicking a multiple choice, then I could do them fast enough for it to be marginally financially rewarding. It would pay better than editing Wikipedia, in any event. Edison (talk) 15:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the thing is, people won't read the questions, just click away as fast as possible in the hope of making as much money as they can. This won't benefit the companies you are advertising and they will not advertise with you because they will think all the questions are being answered by a team of chimpanzees (no disrespect to your people, but if they are clicking randomly as fast as they can, they are hardly going to get any answers right). So, what you would have to do is give them an incentive - get paid only if they get the answers right, but I doubt anyone would be bothered to do it, then, because at that rate of pay, sitting in front of a computer all day reading just to get money is not really worth it. It is tiring and people need to take frequent breaks after a while. People won't want to do it. Sorry. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 15:59, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I could get a program that will click thousands of times a second for me. If I get 1/4 right, then I can still make thousands of $ a day. I like this idea, but I don't think that I would trust the site to actually send me any $ since there are a lot of scams. Googlemeister (talk) 17:53, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I was planning to give correct answers several times a minute, as long as it did not require a lot of typing. Edison (talk) 03:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to check out the Amazon Mechanical Turk. APL (talk) 19:07, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question The Biggest

What is the biggest event in human history? Jc iindyysgvxc (talk) 08:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why, the contact with our alien friends from Frolix 8, of course. Oh wait, that's not been made public yet...

Seriously though, that's a tough question to answer, because "the biggest event in history" is a completely subjective way of putting it. You could go with anything, from the completion of the Sphinx, to the fall of Angkhor Watt or the journey to the moon. Also, as you've been told on another board, please rename the title so it reflects the content of the question. TomorrowTime (talk) 09:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The invention of baseball. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 10:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to "biggest" being subjective, one could also discuss what an "event" is. However, I'll put forward the not-so-recent event of the Toba catastrophe. Jørgen (talk) 11:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, BIGGEST. Well, the Big Bang, obviously. Without it, we wouldn't be here. We might be someplace else, but not here. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 11:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Captain pedantic wants a word - human history, not pre-history?83.100.250.79 (talk) 11:44, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So what does "biggest" mean? The "biggest" event was probably the flu epidemic from the late 1910s. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:13, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about the domestication of dogs, or something like that?83.100.250.79 (talk) 11:44, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the constant references, maybe the invention of sliced bread? --- OtherDave (talk) 12:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Except what was the greatest thing before that? Maybe bread itself? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The greatest claim ever made -- national revelation at Sinai. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 12:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The biggest story since... God talked to Moses!" -- Perry White in Superman Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:43, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

that is, "...since Moses heard voices in his head" --79.38.22.37 (talk) 13:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

God did not speak to only Moses at Sinai, he spoke to the entire nation. And then Moses, in Deuteronomy 4:32-3, challenged any other nation to make such a claim. Yet none has ever...quite telling. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 21:41, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But which came first, bread or beer? Didn't beer get discovered when somebody messed up their bread batter? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 18:39, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NO. DRosenbach: you believe that he spoke, and you are not god. If you have such beliefs, that's a most respectable feeling of yours, as soon as you keep it for you. Please consider that this is not the right place for such posts. ~~Insisting with this troll behaviour is quite stupid, and in fact quite annoying.~~ --pma (talk) 11:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One key moment in that interview occurred when Moses asked God about His real name, and He answered, "Puddintame. Ask Me again, I'll tell you the same." Moses paraphrased that answer as the somewhat more elegant, "I yam what I yam". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Later taken up to great effect by Popeye. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He's strong to the finach, 'cause He eats His spinach. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 08:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The extinction of the other human species leaving only our own. See Homo_(genus)#Species for a rough idea of the time-line. APL (talk) 16:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jc iindyysgvxc has not explained the meaning of his question, but I assume that what is meant is the largest aggregation of people ever for a single in-person event. For example, it was claimed at Woodstock (probably wrongly) that it was the largest gathering of people in history. Our article on Kumbh Mela, a mass Hindu pilgrimage, says that the 2001 Maha Kumbh Mela was attended by around 60 million people, making it the largest gathering anywhere in the world. John M Baker (talk) 14:03, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As am aside the most widely viewed sporting event is of course the Fifa World Cup.--Shahab (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For reasons that defy explanation, countless millions find it fascinating. Including deciding the champion by the equivalent of a fungo-hitting contest. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 15:06, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So far today, Bugs, you've insulted Canada and the most popular sport in the world. Having a bad day? DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The average American's reaction to soccer is similar to the average American's reaction to the metric system. Zzzzz... Regarding Canada, I just defer to Canadian Dave Foley's comment that, "We're so liberal we make Castro look like a Republican!" Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the biggest event in human history - the one that affected the most number of people - was definitely WW2. It's called a 'world war' for a reason. I am not talking about the number of people who died, I mean it affected everyone and changed the shape of geopolitics worldwide. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 19:07, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you say that WW2 changed the shape of civilization more then the Mongol Empire, or the Black Plague, or the discovery of the New World? Googlemeister (talk) 20:48, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can say, as many have, that at the end of WWII, mankind, for the first time, realistically had the tools for its own total destruction. Which counts for something. --68.50.54.144 (talk) 23:12, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I'd have made that link to somewhere a bit more dramatic. Like mutually assured destruction or World War 3. Doomsday device has a pretty picture. Vimescarrot (talk) 00:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Biggest. Event. OK, I get "human history," but the other qualifiers make the question unanswerable without some definitions. But, on the basis of the above, I’d go with WWII. Most of the other events mentioned (e.g., the plague, the Mongols) didn’t even warrant a page 12 story in The Jakarta Post or The Rio Recorder. DOR (HK) (talk) 08:59, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toba eruption? It happened between 70,000 to 75,000 years ago and, according to the Toba catastrophe theory, reduced the entire human population to about 10,000. — Kpalion^(talk) 15:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The biggest event in human history might have been the addition of sprinkles to ice cream. Bus stop (talk) 15:40, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're all completely wrong. The biggest event in all of human history will be when - after a century old drought - the Chicago Cubs finally win the World Series! A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 02:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How many arts and sciences are there in the world

Can some body confirm that how many arts and sciences are there in the world. Is any such list available anywhere? showing the names of all the arts and sciences. Thanks for the support. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.36.1.206 (talk) 10:34, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thirteen. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 10:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actaully, it's seven :) TomorrowTime (talk) 10:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When in doubt, go with 42. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The box at the top-right of the Science article lists many sciences, and there is a similar list in The arts. However, whether any individual subject counts as a science or an art or neither is a matter of opinion, for example does 'Anatomy' count as a science or is it a part of 'Biology'? 81.98.38.48 (talk) 11:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know there are more than hundred basic arts and sciences, I was looking for the complete list, which I couldn't find yet..... please past link to any such list —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.36.1.206 (talk) 11:57, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The question is unanswerable unless & until you can define what a basic art or basic science is. There is no such single definition / definitions change over time / science and art evolve over time. The question is, for all intent & purpose, unanswerable. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you could define exactly what was an art or science, you would still have to agree on how to subdivide them. Are Chemistry, Organic Chemistry and Inorganic Chemistry one, two, or three sciences? DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A major point would be, that such categories are a function of time and the available tools of an era. Alchemie may have been a science not so long ago, cosmology (unless you count Moses and creationism), genetics or cinematography was nowhere in, say, the Renaissance. It would also be misleading (taking genetics as an example) to compare the scientific construct of Gregor Mendel with the vast knowledge in the field of genetics which we have gained in the meantime. Future times may require dsciplines of environmental engineering, terraforming, The Science of Aliens or other - as yet unknown - areas of research and application. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on what your classification criteria are, and how you subdivide. There is no objective way to come up with a number. There are massive inter-academic debates about whether a given branch is a field in its own right or a subfield of another. These debates are not new... in their modern form they have been going on since at least the 19th century, but there are very similar debates that occurred during the Middle Ages, the early Scientific Revolution, and so on. (e.g. "Is mathematics a science or just a tool?" is the main question that Copernicus took up in the intro to his famous book, for theological reasons.) --68.50.54.144 (talk) 21:57, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes very true and agreed...... can some one please guide me to an alphabetical list or so containing fields/branches (I am sacred to say them "art" or "science")

Acarology. Actinobiology. Actinology. Aerobiology. Aerology. Aetiology. Agnoiology. Agrobiology. Agrology. Agrostology. Algology. Allergology. Andrology. Anesthesiology. Angelology. Angiology. Anthropology. Apiology. Arachnology. Archaeology. Archaeology. Archaeozoology. Areology. Assyriology. Astacology. Asteroseismology. Astrobiology. Astrogeology. Astrology. Atmology. Audiology. Autecology. Auxology. Axiology —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.36.15.179 (talk) 07:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean there's no such science as Aardvarkology? DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That list has Astrology not Astronomy, huh?? Vespine (talk) 01:39, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody's being funny. Astronomy would be a "science". Astrology would fall into the "art" category, as with any work of fiction. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 05:20, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on your definition of a "science". The term used to be applied to any organised body of theory and knowledge, regardless of that body's objective factuality or adherence to the (relatively modern concept of) scientific method: Heraldry, for example, was and sometimes is still referred to as a science. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 13:19, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heraldry understood as academic study of old arms rather than creating new ones is definitely a science (in the broad sense). It's usually classified, together with vexillology, sigillography, genealogy, etc., as auxiliary branches of history (we need an article about those). But of course, the common understanding of what is and what isn't science changes with time. Alchemy, astrology, numerology and the like used to be sciences in the past. And today's sciences, like psychology, economics or quantum physics are probably tomorrow's superstitions. — Kpalion^(talk) 08:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WWI History question on Misc desk

Hi, your input would be helpful on this question about Hitler blaming Jews for the loss of World War One. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John 3:16

Why does this Bible reference show up regularly at protests and at sports events? These events rarely have major religious significance. Astronaut (talk) 12:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They're trying to get you to read it and convert you from the Church of Baseball/Football/etc. to Christianity. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's one theory. Another is that they're egotists who want to be seen on national TV, and they're more likely to attract national attention by holding up a "John 3:16" sign than one that says "Circle Me Bert". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John 3:16 & Rollen Stewart, FYI. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:04, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh, yeh. I remember that looney bird. He went to the slammer, as I recall. I like better this pair of quotes: "Judas went out and hanged himself." "Go therefore and do likewise." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:07, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) It's somewhat of an recruitment slogan for Christians in the US, i.e. believe in our god and our messiah or burn in hell forever. It's popular because it's short and easy to remember, making it somewhat of a catch-phrase. It is mostly used in events where a particular group of Christians feels like another group at the same location should become Christians but have previously shown some amount of hidden or open opposition to this. See also our article about John 3:16. Regards So Why 13:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whereas So is merely recruiting for the extreme cynicism party. And most Christians have nothing against baseball or football, so they are not trying to get you to convert away from them. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:43, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You did notice that I used the phrase "a particular group of Christians" to specifically point out that it's not the normal behavior for Christians? ;-) Regards So Why 14:18, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't confuse Baseball with The Church of Baseball. For further details, watch the first few minutes of Bull Durham. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And read about Rollen Stewart and the perils of taking it all too seriously. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason that John 3:16 is used rather then other bible verses is that it's seen as a pretty good one-sentence summary of the Christian faith. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:43, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's unfortunate for Rockin' Rollen that he couldn't get the message across to himself. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:53, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DJ has it right. John 3:16 is pretty much the "Mission statement" of Christianity. If you had to ask a Christian why he is a Christian, and he had to answer in 30 words or less, John 3:16 captures it well... --Jayron32 15:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cecil Adams has this pair of articles on the subject of Rollen "Rock'n Rollen" Stewart and his signs. [1] [2]. It's an odd story that turns weird. APL (talk) 16:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It demonstrates that there can be a fine line between religious faith and lunacy. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 20:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

viz. Theresa of Avila. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 18:42, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scholarship abroad

Hello; how can I find (in the web) scholarship opportunities to work as a scientist? Is there a way to make a payed internship before the master's degree? Thanks! 79.8.129.62 (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you looking to study science, or work as a scientist? And which country are you thinking of? DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:01, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but we need to know 1. where abroad, and 2. what kind of scientist. In each field there are different opportunities, and it no doubt varies in different countries. Many branches of lab science in particular always have technician roles that are often filled by recent college graduates who are building up experience (and some meager income) before applying to graduate study. --68.50.54.144 (talk) 00:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would accept every country; the only request is that the fly should be as cheap as possible (I am from Italy): however, possibly, I would prefer northern europe or, at least, Canada. The field is molecular biology, and I am looking for internship opportunities before fully graduating (now I have a bachelor); it would be perfect to continue with a doctoral position. The matter is that I need to be payed to stay abroad, as I cannot afford to live there. 87.6.123.217 (talk) 07:23, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Usually as a masters' student, at least in the US, if you didn't get a scholarship, you would get a teaching or research assistantship to pay your expenses with. A teaching assistant (TA) would help with instruction of low-level science classes, grade homework and exams, etc. An RA would work on a professor's research projects including doing some technician-type tasks. In mathematics you would more likely work as a TA in your first year or two, and become an RA (which is a better job) after you had advanced enough in your graduate studies to be useful to a professor. In biology maybe it's the other way around--I don't know. 67.122.211.205 (talk) 08:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; do you know any helpful website to get a TA or a RA? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.53.69.131 (talk) 14:28, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You do this through professors and your program, not a centralized website. Here's how it works in the US, anyway: you apply for a school. They let you in, they offer you a "package". It can range from "nothing at all, ha ha ha" to "lots of money for doing nothing." If it is not in the "money" category, they say, "of course you can make money for tuition by being a TA or an RA." And so you do. Now in Europe I imagine this is somewhat different, as the European academic system is less drawn out than the American one is, but I imagine a similar principle applies. Any and all specific questions need to be directed to the people working at the programs you are interested in, because the policies are different from department to department, from school to school. My suggestion: get in touch with someone, almost anyone, who does work in a field you are interested in. Ask them if they have a little time to help point you in the right direction. Tell them your interests and your story and see what they say. They will likely say, "oh, well you should look at program X and program Y and program Z." Then you get in touch with people at those programs and ask them the same question. After doing this a few times you should have a good idea of what places might be worth investigating, and then you can look into them directly, see what their options are. --68.50.54.144 (talk) 13:27, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot; I'll use your method!87.1.125.1 (talk) 23:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prison riot in Kentucky

There was recently a prison riot in the U.S. state of Kentucky. Is there an article about it? B-Machine (talk) 20:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first step would be to find a citation for it. Do you have one? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 20:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Googling indicates you refer to the prison riot in Burgin, Kentucky. Neither our article on prison riots nor the entry on Burgin has any reference to it. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~The "Burgin prison" seems to have a different name and its address is in Danville. Edison (talk) 02:41, 26 August 2009 (UTC)~~[reply]

It is called the "Northpoint Training Center" and was reportedly damaged beyond repair by the riot. One questions whether it is "in " Burgin because the prison inmate population was far larger than the reported population of the town. Also Google maps and Wikipedia say the address is "710 Walter Reed Rd, Danville, KY‎ 40422" although the Kentucky Department of Corrections says it is at "P.O. Box 479, Hwy 33, 710 Walter Reed Road, Burgin, Kentucky 40310." Someone down there seems downright corn-fused. Edison (talk) 16:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's covered in our article on the Northpoint Training Center, which despite its name is a medium-security prison. The facility's physical address and its post office box mailing address have different towns, which is not particularly unusual. John M Baker (talk) 18:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Greek Theater

Hello, who attended performances of greek theater in Athens (5th and 4th century BC)? Men and women? Citiziens and metics? Free and slaves? Which agegroups? --92.225.4.240 (talk) 21:46, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would have directed you to Wikipedia's article Theatre of ancient Greece, but it is surprisingly lacking on that topic. If you do find good sources, the article could use expansion in that direction! --Jayron32 23:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could try this book, which has a chapter about the audience. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:07, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]