Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 June 18

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.

June 18

Zimbabwean presidential election, 2008 and Sabina Mugabe

This seems like Zimbabwe runs for elections every 6 years, 2002, 2008, then the next election will be 2014. I just wonder if Robert Mugabe will stand then (though I doubt it since he'll be 90 then) which possible peoples will take over him. Is Sabina Mugabe still alive or she is dead. I saw on one article title f Sabina mugabe is dead.--69.229.243.248 (talk) 01:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The First Post says she died on Sunday. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Thokozani Khuphe could be next, Morgan Tsai whatever was elect by 47 percent in 2008 election, and 40 percent in 2002 election. I hear about attemption of assissination to him though.--69.229.243.248 (talk) 03:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Somebody can answer this Since Morgan Tsvangirai caought by police by traffic violation in June 2008, would he be able to run 2014 election, and overplace Mugabe. If Mugabe is 90, this is unlikely he will stand that long.--69.229.243.248 (talk) 03:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

One for the historians

For a thing I'm writing, I need some small events that changed the course of European history - for want of a nail a kingdom was lost, sort of stuff. The tricky bit is, I only want events preceding 1582. Can anyone help?

Thanks Adambrowne666 (talk) 02:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The easiest would be to change the life of some historical person; say Martin Luther or Cristopher Columbus experienced something as children that made their lives turn out very differently. Perhaps Genghis Khan lived 20 years longer than in "our" timeline. For more literal "want of a nail" scenarios, I'm sure someone else will have plenty to suggest... There's really infinitely many possibilities, some of which have been used in fiction before with good results. Jørgen (talk) 02:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Another "key historical person" could be an early Medici. If s/he had married a different person with a lesser drive for power and political awareness, the Italian Renaissance wouldn't have occurred. In the same way and at the same time, anyway. Tempshill (talk) 03:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

You could probably find a way that if Henry VIII had won the wrestling match at the Field of the Cloth of Gold, English-French relations might have been much better, and he might have been absorbed in wars against mutual enemies of England and France (take your pick) rather than becoming infatuated with Anne Boleyn and eventually splitting from the Church of Rome, founding the Anglican Church, and setting up another wall between England and Europe, with many interesting consequences. Tempshill (talk) 03:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Are you asking for actual historical events, which is how I read your question, or hypothetical alternate histories, as Tempshill is suggesting? Adam Bishop (talk) 04:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

If the former, I'll plug the wrestling match again as something that may have changed history. Tempshill (talk) 05:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, that's still an alternate history...I think he means microhistorical events that aren't really well-known, but which actually did alter history in interesting ways. Sort of in the style of Connections...but we will have to wait for clarification. Adam Bishop (talk) 05:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Ghengis Khan not being killed by his lover/second wife (as is one of the theories surrounding his death) would indeed lead interesting places, but have had limited importance in Europa. His attention was on Asia at the time of his death. Attila the Hun, however! His death caused the immediate retreat of the Hun forces. Ditto the well-known Julius Caesar, who may for any reason have avoided his assassination. On the note of the Roman empire, imagine any tiny event surrounding the founding of the Byzantine Empire, perhaps with regard to the arrangements for the heirs. Not to mention the battle of Hastings! (ONE arrow (as is believed) - I think this might be what you're looking for!) 90.149.144.31 (talk) 05:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The death of Gengis Khan did lead to the recall of the army that was ravaging the Ukraine, so maybe Poland would have suffered two Mongol invasions (not one) if he hadn't died at that time... AnonMoos (talk) 17:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

What a great question! I recalled dimly that a nosebleed suffered by James II during the Glorious Revolution prompted him not to give battle next day (bad omen) and the Orange army took England unopposed... and indeed, it's in our article at Glorious_Revolution#The_collapse_of_James.27_regime. James never recovered his position and lost his throne. --Dweller (talk) 09:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Going back even further how about Hannibal in the 2nd Punic War? Midway through the war Hannibal was roaming southern Italy keeping his army fed, but without a big enough force to attack Rome; it's a stalemate scenario since the Romans are too scared to attack his army again. His brother Hasdrubal raises his own army, with a siege train to meet up with Hannibal. He slips into Northern Italy and he and sends a rider to tell Hannibal where to meet up with him. The rider is caught and Hasdrubal's army is defeated, this gives the Romans momentum that will last until the end of the war.

If that rider had taken a different route and got through, it is likely the two brothers would have met up. From the Roman point of view two brothers of this legendary family together was an apocalypse scenario, and it is perfectly possible Rome would have fallen, and the Empire destroyed in it's infancy. Then Islam would have been the dominant religion in Europe, the Celtic and Gallic tribes of Northern Europe would have evolved in isolation (the Carthaginians would likely have stopped after Italy, or at least not have expanded very far). All totally different, because one rider wasn't careful enough or lucky enough to get through. Prokhorovka (talk) 14:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Poul Anderson wrote a story Delenda Est about a very similar scenario (however, without the Islam, since Christianity was a significant influence, direct or indirect, on the origins of Islam). AnonMoos (talk) 22:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

If the Crusading army hadn't inexplicably forgotten that water is extremely important in the Holy Land in summer (Saladin could only ascribe the aberration to Satan!), the disaster at Hattin, which is one of the most decisive battles in history, with a quite extraordinary domino-effect in its wake could have been averted. Jerusalem was never recaptured by the Crusaders (although parts of it were briefly handed over as part of a deal nearly 200 years later). The Third Crusade that followed was a frustrating affair and the Fourth... well, I still find it hard to believe what happened in the Fourth Crusade. --Dweller (talk) 14:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, if the Fourth Crusade hadn't turned out that way, then perhaps there would be no Genoese colony in Caffa, and no direct route for the Black Death to enter Europe. Adam Bishop (talk) 20:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

A little broad, perhaps, but how about if the Western Roman Empire hadn't collapsed as it did? Would Europe have evolved into a unified country with a unified language? Without the dark ages, would majour technological and social innovations have occurred hundreds of years earlier than they did? Would I have a flying car and be speaking Latin at the moment? I suppose I wouldn't exist. hmm... TastyCakes (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

If Stephen of Blois hadn't decided to disembark from the White Ship because of an attack of diarrhoea (according to at least one source), then he'd have died along with the then heir to the throne William Adelin and would not have been around to snatch the throne from his cousin the Empress Matilda after the death of Henry I. That's not to say the Anarchy would have been avoided, because another male claimant such as William Clito would almost certainly have come forward - but things might have happened differently. But in any case, if the White Ship had not delayed sailing until after dark, or the crew had refrained from drinking (if that's what happened), then it would probably have passed the treacherous rock without incident, William Adelin would not have drowned, England might have been spared 19 years of chaos, and there would have been no Plantagenet dynasty, no Hundred Years' War and so on. Karenjc 19:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Except that if Isabel of France married a different king of England he'd have the same claim to France .... —Tamfang (talk) 03:50, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

My love for the Plantagenets may be showing, but if Geoffrey II, Duke of Brittany hadn't died, John of England would not have inherited Richard the Lionheart's throne, and the Plantagenet Empire, including much of France, may not have been lost (there's a reason John is called "Johnny Lackland"). Or, even earlier, if Henry the Young King hadn't died, who knows how things might have come out? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I've always read that John was called Lackland before he got the throne, because Henry II assigned his lands to his first three sons: Normandy and England to Henry "rex filius", Aquitaine to Richard and Brittany to Geoffrey. (Henry jr died young, spoiling the plan.) —Tamfang (talk) 17:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Have a look at Lynn White's Medieval technology and social change. Stirrups, metal plows, etc. It's well worth reading. Weepy.Moyer (talk) 21:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

If the Umayyad forces had bothered sending some scouts to find out how strong the Frankish forces were, rather than just assuming that they were weak, they might have held their ground during the Battle of Tours, beaten Charles Martel's force, and secured much of Western Europe. Warofdreams talk 00:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Good question, Adam. I would agree with Warofdreams above, as the stand of Charles Martel and co. saved everything west of France and Germany from being under a Muslim theocracy (as opposed to Christian monarchies). —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 01:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

There are dozens of these talked about in the context of the Peloponnesian War which certainly could have changed everything since. What if Pericles had not died? More than one historian, and Thucydides himself, would likely suggest that this would have led to Athenian victory (although Donald Kagan would certainly disagree). Had Athens won the golden age of Greece might well have continued. Perhaps then Rome would not have conquered Greece, etc. and everything would be different. More broadly, consider if the plague had not come to Athens. Cool3 (talk) 22:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow - had no idea I'd inspire such a response! Thanks heaps, all - a wealth of extremely useful stuff here Adambrowne666 (talk) 23:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC) - sorry, should add that Adam Bishop was correct in his interpretation; I wanted microhistorical events (nice term) on which larger events hinged - thanks again. Adambrowne666 (talk) 00:14, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

fact or something else?

I was wondering if any of the victims of the Hi-Fi shop murders gargled up the Drāno that they were forced to drink? Did the perpetrators yell, "Don't gargle it up!!", "Don't spit it up!!", or anything else similar? The reason I'm asking is it looked like those types of things in Aftermath: A Test of Love. Anyone know?69.203.157.50 (talk) 07:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm almost certain no one has any idea what you're talking about. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

It has a whole article about the murders in Wikipedia. It does not record their having yelled anything, although two victims survived. However, they did try to duct-tape the victims' mouths so the Drano would not come out. They got the idea from a movie, apparently.- KoolerStill (talk) 11:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

It is pretty sad when a creative writer thinks up some stupid or evil idea and puts in a movie, then evil or stupid people try it with loss of life. It is like WP:BEANS. I suppose if a dunce does the harm to himself it might be taken as Darwin in action. In the robbery in question, spitting up the Drano in the bad guy's face sounds like a fine idea, aiming for the eyes in particular. A similar rule would apply if a bad guy hands you a gun and tells you to shoot yourself in the head, like Nazis did to some of their military who were out of favor, or in a Vietnam movie about making prisoners play Russian roulette, or hands you a grenade with the pin pulled (like on the MS Achille Lauro hijacking) and ever steps around a corner or 30 feet or more away. Edison (talk) 19:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Darwin in action?69.203.157.50 (talk) 21:43, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Edison is referring to Darwin Awards. AndyJones (talk) 21:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Evolution in action, he means. The unfit for survival destroying themselves.- KoolerStill (talk) 06:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I told a kid who had some familiarity with street gangs about the Nazis arresting an SA member early in the evil career of that movement, then handing the arrestee a gun with one bullet and placing him in a cell to commit suicide. Periodically the jailor would slide open the viewing grating on the door and look in on him to see if he had done the deed yet. He never did, so they shot him in the cell. The street-savvy kid said "I sure know what would happen if I were in there the first time he looked in." Edison (talk) 02:20, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Arresting a head of state

Is it possible for a country to arrest and prosecute the acting head of state (or other senior leader) of another country? Without wanting this to appear as a political statement, but wanting to provide a contemporary example, could Austria arrest and prosecute Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for Holocaust denial (assuming they could actually prove that of course) if he travelled to Austria? What about more serious crimes? Could a country arrest an acting leader for war crimes? Could they arrest them in a third country (e.g. Austria arrest him in Sweden). I would assume that this could fall up diplomatic immunity, but cannot find anything in the article that deals with it - or whether a country could waive its commitment to diplomatic immunity if it felt warranted (e.g. whether Austria could decide not to comply with diplomatic immunity in this case). Also, it would obviously go against many conventions and would open up a whole can of worms, but I'd just like to know if it was legally possible, if a country set its mind to doing it. Has this ever happened, and has it ever happened in recent history? Thanks Nice Paper (talk) 08:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

They can certainly try - there is an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for Omar el-Bashir, who is a sitting head of state (of Sudan). But all he has to do is avoid travelling to a country that would dare arrest him, if any exist (and he has already easily travelled to countries who are ignoring the warrant). Adam Bishop (talk) 08:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

See Immunity from prosecution (international law) for a discussion of the two types of immunity at international law and how they differ.

For the problem with arresting an Iranian for an Austrian crime, see Jurisdiction and Universal jurisdiction. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

If you want to arrest a foreign leader in his country, you would be using the military, as standard police forces don't usually work outside their borders. In that case, is it technically an arrest? Saddam Hussein is an example, although I am not sure if he was technically the leader of Iraq when he was captured. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 13:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

As far as the dictionary definition is concerned, it could be called an arrest (one definition in the OED is "To catch, capture, seize, lay hold upon." which would apply, although the OED calls that definition obsolete). Whether Hussein was the leader of Iraq at the time is debatable. He wasn't the de facto leader, but he could have been the de jure leader - removing someone from power militarily is an extralegal action, so the legal interpretation of it is always a little blurry. --Tango (talk) 13:43, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Custody and jurisdiction are related but different concepts.

If you are using the military, then you have to consider laws of war -- see also armed conflict. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 03:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I didn't mention either custody or jurisdiction... and they don't seem like particularly related concepts to me anyway. Jurisdiction is about what law applies to a situation, custody is about who has de facto control over a child or prisoner. --Tango (talk) 17:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The question was about jurisdiction. The anon poster before you seemed to confuse the two issues of (obtaining) custody vs having jurisdiction over a person. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 08:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Legally speaking, only Austrian law would be relevant (since any other laws and treaties aren't enforceable against the Austrian state) and Austria can change Austrian law, so yes, they could arrest him if they wanted. Diplomatically, they would have to be very careful. Visiting heads of state do generally have diplomatic immunity and ignoring that may well cause problems even with people that don't like Ahmadinejad. If Austria are willing to ignore immunity for him, they might be willing to do so for other heads of state, which may make other heads of state (and even regular diplomats) reluctant to travel to Austria. Given Austria's geographical position, I doubt anyone would actually declare war on them, but they could end up somewhat isolated. They may also end up being the target of terrorism. --Tango (talk) 13:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

For another situation which in some ways was very different but might be considered comparable or at least relevant, see Manuel Noriega. Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Spain has been known to arrest former heads of state (Pinochet), and Belgium has made similar threats to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, we would have to see if they ever have call to carry out such actions. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Belgium is a special case: see Universal jurisdiction. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 03:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Certainly. Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic, Augusto Pinochet, and Manuel Noriega were all arrested and charged with crimes in recent times. A number of senior German officials were tried at the Nuremberg Trials. Napoleon was sent to Elba, then to St. Helena. Weepy.Moyer (talk) 22:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Jewish influence in Ethiopian Christianity

I heard that there is some Jewish tradition in Ethiopian Christianity. I know the story about the Queen of Sheba and Menelik, her son by Solomon, but were any kings of Ethiopia (Axum) Jewish before the Axum converted to Christianity in the fourth century. Also, what was the situation in Ethiopia at the time of the Holocaust; I knew there was a small indigenous Jewish population at the time.

In a number of ways, traditional Ethiopian Christianity and traditional Ethiopian Judaism were similar to each other in cultural practices, etc. (except that the Jews did not accept the Geez New Testament, obviously). The Ethopian kings traced their descent back to the Biblical Solomon, there were even Jewish "monks", and the Jews were largely uninfluenced by Rabbinic Judaism of the Talmud. See Beta Israel, etc. AnonMoos (talk) 17:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

According to the book From Falashas to Ethiopian Jews: The External Influences for Change: c. 1860-1960 by Daniel P. Summerfield ([1]), the Jews of Ethiopia, unlike those of Italy, were not persecuted by the Italian occupiers during World War II. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

What were the views of Haile Selassie I and other Ethiopian Emperors on Judaism? --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 08:40, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

British Law/ Prisons

I am writing a novel about a man in a British Prison and have several questions: Is there such a thing as involuntary manslaughter? Should he be transported outside the prison, would he be in shackles and/or leg irons? Would he wear clothes different to the prison clothing, such as orange or stripes or anything? Thanks...I've searched HM Prison websites and there is no indication of anything. Hunter50 (talk) 15:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Prison_uniform suggests the UK standard for clothing. I doubt a person in on manslaughter would be in any kind of high-security prison unless there were shortages of spaces/it was temporary (or preference for his location). Similarly I doubt they'd be in shackles - they'll be escorted by prison/policy officials and hand-cuffed likely but not leg-irons/shackles unless they were considered extremely A) dangerous and B) Likely to try something. Also worth a look is Manslaughter#Involuntary manslaughter. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 16:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

If a prisoner is transported, it's almost always by "custody officers", who are private citizens, employees of private security companies with government contracts (like Securicor). They wear uniforms, but are mostly mall-cops (I guess there is some law granting them the rights to maintain custody of people). This job was formerly done by the police (for court trips) and sometimes by the prison service (for inter-prison transfers). By default a prisoner will wear the standard prison uniform (although remandees wear normal civilian clothes). People attending court (e.g. for an appeal) are allowed to change into civilian clothes; often their relatives bring in suits for them (or, for the indigent, are supplied by prisoner help charities). Very high risk prisoners (such as terrorism suspects) are still transported by the police; I think I've seen court drawings showing such folks in hi-vis uniforms, rather than the standard blue. As with most countries, most escapes from such custodial trips occur when physical restraints are removed (such as the funeral of a relative, or a visit to hospital). Incidentally the vans the custody officers drive are reportedly quite nice - each prisoner gets his own little microcell (maybe the size of an airplane bathroom) with a small smoked-glass window and a TV. Low security prisoners nearing the end of their sentence sometimes travel outside the prison estate unescorted, for training or transition to work, but are expected to by back by an early evening curfew. If you want an idea of what life is like in a modern british low-security prison, former politician Jonathan Aitken has written two books about his incarceration. I don't know of a factual work that describes the life inside the scary-end of the prison system; Jimmy Boyle's books describe things 20 years ago. 87.113.134.218 (talk) 16:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

A "custody officer" in the UK is a police sergeant that is in charge of the cells at a police station. The people you are talking about must have a different name here. --Tango (talk) 17:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

It seems formally "detention custody officer" or "prison custody officer" [2] [3], although in practice they're just called custody officers[4]. Indeed the officer in a police station in charge of those held there is also called the custody officer (and it's entirely a different job); in Scotland that person is called the Bar Officer. 87.113.134.218 (talk) 17:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

For factual information on higher security prisons, some of the Erwin James columns in The Guardian could be a useful source. Warofdreams talk 00:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

And a noteworthy thing, if you're writing about the environment immediately outside British prisons, is their location. Almost all are located in towns and cities (and generally not the outskirts); few are isolated in bleak uninhabited places. So the image of the stripy-shirt clad prisoner fleeing across a dank moor, dragging a ball and chain and pursued by armed screws and baying dogs isn't going to happen. Take a look at the Google Streetview of Belmarsh Prison, probably the most sensitive prison in the UK here and you'll see that opposite it is a normal little housing estate, a block of flats, a Domino's Pizza and a Paddy Power betting shop. Dartmoor this ain't. 87.113.134.218 (talk) 17:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Just to add that Full Sutton Prison is a high-security prison in the countryside, well at least it's a good 15 miles from a city (York). 22:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Visible submerged shipwrecks

I came across this picture of the USS Arizona submerged during the attack on Pearl Harbor. Are there other submerged shipwrecks which can be seen from above? Jay (talk) 21:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't know of any, but the English Channel would be a good place to look. It is an incredibly busy shipping lane, has been for centuries and is fairly shallow. Prokhorovka (talk) 21:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

A lot of at least partly submerged wrecks in Norway: news article (Google translation). There's a video there but I have troubles with the video settings on my computer, so couldn't see it. Jørgen (talk) 22:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

If a ship is sunk in "fairly shallow" water in a busy shipping channel, it may be near enough the surface to be a hazard. In that case I would expect efforts to be made to either raise it (whether for restoration or as scrap) or else to demolish it in place. This is just a casual observation and I'm not saying there aren't any such visible wrecks.

This wreck is not submerged and probably would not be counted as a ship by most people, but considering its location, I'd bet it's been seen by more people than any other. --Anonymous, 04:30 UTC, June 19, 2009.

The Plassey ship wreck is not submerged, but considering its location, I'd bet it's been seen by more people than any other.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Fixed your link --Anon, 22:25 UTC, June 22.

Try the "world's largest ship graveyard" at Nouadhibou, Mauritania; also Mallows Bay ship graveyard, Maryland. There are also many beached wrecks around the word, for example those at the ship graveyard near Bluff, New Zealand, Gwinva (talk) 10:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

That is a "sea" of information, and with the newly learnt terminology I also discovered there is wikipedia article on ship graveyard. But I guess there may not be many visible (fully) submerged wrecks for the reason what Anon suggested, except to serve as a memorial like the Pearl Harbor one. Jay (talk) 10:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Fathom Five National Marine Park, in Georgian Bay, Ontario, has several shipwrecks that are visible from the surface. One is so shallow that it sticks out of the water during periods of low water. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Tosca

Why is 'Tosca' the answer to a cryptic crossword question, 'Turncoats for the opera'? --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 21:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure, but Tosca is an opera, and the synopsis seems to consist of a fair amount of deceit and military men, so I assume that is the link. Prokhorovka (talk) 21:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

It’s an anagram of ‘coats’! Ian Spackman (talk) 21:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

It's parsed as 'Turn "coats" for the opera'. AlexTiefling (talk) 21:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

This is why I'm rubbish at crosswords! Prokhorovka (talk) 22:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Fantastic! It took me nine years to get this answer! Cheers! --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 22:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I saw a fascinating documentary only last week, Wordplay (film), which provides a great insight into how crossword makers construct their puzzles, and how players get the answers. I thoroughly recommend it. I particularly liked the "theme" song one of the guys sang, which has the line "If you don't come across, I'm gonna be down". -- JackofOz (talk) 04:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

However, as I understand it (I haven't seen it myself), the film does not mention cryptic crosswords at all. They're really a separate species of puzzle from regular crosswords. --Anonymous, edited 04:43 UTC, June 19, 2009.

Wordplay is terrific, even if you're not hooked on crosswords. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:53, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

That's probably because Wordplay is an American film, whereas cryptic crosswords are a UK/Commonwealth phenomenon. You don't see cryptic crosswords in the US, except perhaps in a "look at this funny British variant of a crossword puzzle!" novelty context. -- 128.104.112.114 (talk) 16:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The anti-American joke just writes itself sometimes, doesn't it? ;) --Tango (talk) 17:26, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I did not hear the word "cryptic" mentioned once, but I can tell you that a lot of the clues in the puzzles shown were extremely what I would call "cryptic". -- JackofOz (talk) 22:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, you can readily find cryptic crosswords in the U.S. They appear regularly in, for example, the New York Times Magazine (part of the Sunday edition) and in The Atlantic Monthly. I'd agree they're less common here, but not unknown. --- OtherDave (talk) 15:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

latest on shooting suspect

I read somewhere that Terry Sedlacek is going to be tried this month for murder. This is in reference to the 2009 Maryville First Baptist Church shooting. Has the trial started yet? Who would be called on to testify?69.203.157.50 (talk) 21:43, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Only one Google news link in the last month:[5], which says merely "He's pleaded not guilty and is scheduled for trial next month.". Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The article was dated May 21. So will the trial ever begin?69.203.157.50 (talk) 04:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)