Humanities desk
< May 28	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 30 >

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.

May 29

U.S. Spelling Bee & participant race

Has anyone established a reason why South Asians are disproportionately represented in the U.S. Spelling Bee final rounds? Are spelling bees hugely popular in South Asia? 61.189.63.185 (talk) 03:57, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps there is a greater cultural tolerance for memorizing meaningless letter sequences. Most of the deciding words seem to be transliterations from foreign words, somewhat capriciously done. Might as well memorize a series of license plate numbers, for all the practical use. Words which are actually likely to be misspelled in, say, college level courses, are rarely the winning words. The final words are generally of such low usage frequency they would not be encountered in 16 years of college education. Edison (talk) 04:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Our List of Scripps National Spelling Bee champions includes the winning words - which aren't always so rare as you claim, Edison. Rmhermen (talk) 05:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A quick scan tells me 75% of the words are found only in dictionaries. Tempshill (talk) 05:58, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A quick look at the first dozen years made me think, yeah, they're words I had at least heard before age 20. Then I looked at the most recent few years... I'm in my 30s, quite well read, university educated, and I've neither heard nor seen more than two of the most recent 15 words. --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 07:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC) [reply]

What South Asians? There are a lot of Americans (and a few Canadians) of South Asian extraction. The critical factor is likely their parents' culture's emphasis on the importance of education. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clarityfiend is most likely correct. South Asian culture places a heavy emphasis on good education to get ahead of the rest of the population. In addition, India has a long history of rote-learning, which can benefit spelling-bee participants (although there are multiple techniques, including spelling rules, foreign language spelling rules, definitions, etc. That's why you're allowed to know the definition and cultural origin of the words). I wish we'd had them in my area when I was in school. Steewi (talk) 06:43, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What South Asians? There are a lot of Americans (and a few Canadians) of South Asian extraction. Please don't tell me you honestly thought I meant South Asian nationals? They wouldn't be disproportionately represented then would they, since nearly everyone from those countries looks like that! Obviously I meant with respect to North American residents, as seeing the final stage one with no other data could reasonably infer that the United States is half ethnic South Asian. Thank you for your response, Steewi, that's what I was looking for. 61.189.63.185 (talk) 06:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a fan of spelling bees in particular, but I especially dislike the rule allowing you to ask for the etymology of the word. In what possible situation will you ever be in where you know the origin of a word other than a spelling bee? Eiad77 (talk) 06:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can't ask for the etymology, just the language of origin. Despite the abuse of language by some spelling bee people (who you would expect to know better!), an etymology is far more than that. --Tango (talk) 10:34, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The winning words are usually English transliterations of non-English words of excruciatingly low frequency of usage, such that one will likely never need to spell them in learned discourse. Thus a spelling bee has very little to do with a good education. This is not "How do you spell relief?" It smacks of home-schooled kids sitting and wasting their time memorizing the special list of thousands of contest words. Memorizing digits of pi would be about as related to a "good education" as this. Edison (talk) 13:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looked pretty reasonable until the 1990s, then they stopped using "real" words and started using esoteric garbage. I mean sure a word like discombobulation might be used, but how often has the word appoggiatura come up in an English conversation? I mean, even my spell check does not think it is a word. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 14:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Memorizing obscure words may not be "good education" by itself, but isn't it good to learn how to spell? Isn't it good to learn the sort of rules of spelling, grammar, and etymology that are necessary to do well in the spelling bee? Do you think that these skills aren't applicable to anything else? I don't know what these kids end up doing but I'm sure most of them end up with advanced degrees and academic-type jobs (I read the other day that a number of them ended up in neuroscience.) What about anything else kids do? Is it useful to for kids to play tennis from a very young age? How reasonable is it for anyone to run a marathon, or learn to pole-vault? Or are these okay because they are physical skills, not mental? Adam Bishop (talk) 16:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See, I used to go to Music School on Saturday mornings, run by the county. Appoggiatura seems like a perfectly reasonable word for children to be using, to me. Those with an education that did not feature as much formal western music may disagree. 80.41.31.27 (talk) 20:47, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the looks of it, those newer spelling words are all about the exceptions to the spelling rules. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 18:07, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are foreign words, so there really aren't any spelling rules. --Tango (talk) 21:43, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gramer? We don't need no steenking gramer! (that aside, there aren't really any spelling rules to what you would perceive as Real English, either. There's alway exceptions and exceptions to exceptions.) TomorrowTime (talk) 21:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you've missed my point. It's considered rather rude to refer to people who've grown up in America as "South Asian". Clarityfiend (talk) 22:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you have preferred I said "all the brown-skinned Americans" ? I think I made the subject of my question clear in the most polite & concise way possible.61.189.63.185 (talk) 23:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Asian American is the generally accepted term, after all we have an article on it. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 09:53, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The rest of the world are happy with "Asian" (or "South Asian", if you want, but the phrase isn't very common in the UK). "Asian" is a race, "American" is a nationality, if you care about both then say "Asian American", if you only care about the race, say "Asian". You can say "of Asian origin" or "of Asian descent" if you want to be clearer. --Tango (talk) 21:00, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was only in Britain that "Asian" means "Indian subcontinental" or "South Asian". Elsewhere, (well, certainly here,) "Asian" means "East Asian" or "Mongoloid", or the more general Asian, depending on context. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 05:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Britain we use "Asian" to mean Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, etc. and "Oriental" to refer to Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc.. I think other people use "Asian" to mean people from anywhere in Asia (which makes a certainly amount of sense, I must admit!). --Tango (talk) 22:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe in Britain, we tend to be either more specific or get rid of any distinction. Iraq is in Asia, but we don't tend to refer to British-born Iraqis as Asian. We generally just say they were British. Also, there would be a problem when talking about Russians in the UK, as most of Russia is in Asia. A British-born Russian with parents from Vladivostok would, by the definition above, be an Asian-Brit, but we don't say that. We just say he's a British citizen. For questionnaire purposes, the usual questions ask what race are you, and the usual tick boxes are 'black (african), black (british), black (other), asian, caucasian (british), irish, caucasian (other), and other'. I have no idea why Irish has its own tick box, but there you go. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 08:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

North Korean Infantry - Main Weapon

Our article on North Korean Army was very informative, but doesn't say anything about the weapons the army uses. I'd like to know what the main weapon for the infantry is. I would assume, from my ignorance, that it would be the AK-47, but maybe they use something else. Does anyone know anything about it? --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 06:32, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer, but if I had to guess I'd guess the QBZ-95 from the PLA of China, not the AK-47. Although, the marching photos I see are the AK-47 with bayonet attached, so maybe you're right. Shadowjams (talk) 09:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, you guessed wrong. The North Koreans follow a policy of Juche so all of their basic weapons have to be developed in North Korea and not imported. The economic dissaster in north korea means that the infantry units are still using AK-47 and AKM variants. They might have introduced a bullpup version of the AK-47 (like the Norinco Type 86S) which usues the same ammunition as the standard AK-47 and they might be producing limited numbers of the licensed or copied AK-74 rifle for elite units but nothing more complex or expensive. Mieciu K (talk) 21:21, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - To be fair, I did say the picture had an AK-47. Shadowjams (talk) 05:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes you did. But there is no right answer for this question North Korea is a paranoid stalinist state which is unpredicteble. The main infantry weapon is still the AK-47 but even the CIA isn't 100% sure. 153.19.11.235 (talk) 14:13, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - All they (the CIA) have to do is ask a soldier on the south side of the DMZ to use his binoculars to check what weapon the guys on the other side of the DMZ are carrying right? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 16:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        And how are they going to check what and how many weapons do they have stored for wartime use in warehouses? Warsaw pact countries used to gather huge ammounts of weapons that went straight to storage, without being fired even once. Even right now you can sometimes buy in the US ex-Warsaw Pact brand new machine guns and AK-47 rifles and even older bolt action Mosin rifles which have spent the last 50 or 60 years in wooden crates wraped in waxed paper. That the North Korean paramilitary units train with wooden guns does not mean that they do not have millions of brand new guns stored somwhere. And we will probably not know untill this regime collapses since operating a spy network is next to impossible when everybody is so paranoid about contacts with forigners. 153.19.11.235 (talk) 12:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't need binoculars. They're only twenty yards away. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 08:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which Buddha Statue ? (done)

I am trying to identify a defined Buddha statue. One picture here and another here. The folds of the clothes are special. Any concrete suggestions (Google Immages => nothing so far) --Grey Geezer 07:08, 29 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grey Geezer (talk • contribs)

Looks like a very ordinary Buddha statue to me. Named Buddhas are normally identified by colour, mudra, posture, and any implements they hold, but we can't see enough of that statue to be able to identify it as a particular Buddha.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:28, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reformulating my question: Where is THIS Statue standing (those curls, those earlobes, that mouth, that special clothing [Why was THAT ONE chosen as the book cover?]. I am aware that there are different kinds of Buddha statues but THIS one ... which country, which location. Thanx --Grey Geezer 10:48, 29 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grey Geezer (talk • contribs)

Found it ... via the curls => "Mathura, Standing Buddha, 4. Cent. --Grey Geezer 11:13, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Search for the orignal artwork

Does anybody know where this:

picture has been taken from? To me it looks like a younger version of Graeco-Buddhist art. --Liebeskind (talk) 09:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, can't help, but isn't it odd that two people have asked the very same question in the space of two hours (see Grey Geezer's post above at 07:08)? Ericoides (talk) 09:12, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I overlooked that paragraph --Liebeskind (talk) 09:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems too coincidental to be a coincidence ...? Ericoides (talk) 09:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Buy one of the books that are featuring this picture on the cover. If you are lucky they will have provided the information about the cover image in the colophon. --Saddhiyama (talk) 10:27, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Favonius date of birth

Anyone know when Marcus Favonius, the Roman politician, was born? Thanks. Ericoides (talk) 07:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found "Born about the year 90" (BC), A History of Cynicism, p 120, but I didn't see where this information came from. I found nothing in Plutarch. Since he was chosen as an aedile around 53/52 BC, and the minimum age for that office seems to have been 35, I guess he was probably born before 88/87 BC. ---Sluzzelin talk 12:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that Sluzzelin, it's a piece of info that seems tricky to hunt down; and as you say, Dudley's date is of unknown provenance. Still, I've stuck it in MF's page, along with your ref. It would be nice to know more about Favonius' family and youth too... Ericoides (talk) 13:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is the contribution of coal (percentage) to the total energy consumption in Poland?

In Germany nobody can answer this question. Answers in German Wikipedia vary from 22 to 95 percent. The later number is from German TV (ARD).

--IuserA (talk) 08:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This site says that in 1998 coal provided "around 70% of Poland's primary energy supply, but this is expected to fall as use of other sources of primary energy increase. Almost all of Poland's electricity production and district heating is coal fired." And this article, from 2008, claims that Poland "generates 96 percent of its electricity in power stations fired by coal". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 10:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These figures from 2004 are the best I've found, and they essentially agree with those given above. 59% of its primary energy supply came from coal, and 92% of electricity generation was from coal. Putting the two figures together suggests that around 79% of total energy consumption was contributed by coal, in 2004. Warofdreams talk 13:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Primary energy supply includes energy used to generate electricity, so it does not make sense to adjust the figure for primary energy supply with the figure for electricity generation. Therefore, in 2004, 59% of Poland's energy supply came from coal. The percentage of Poland's energy consumption (somewhat smaller than its supply due to inefficiencies) from coal should be nearly the same as the percentage of its supply that came from coal. Marco polo (talk) 14:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The latest data I found is for 2007. Coal (including hard coal and lignite) accounted for 60.51 percent of primary energy consumption in Poland in that year. Details below:

Structure of primary energy consumption in Poland
	2003		2004		2005		2006		2007
	PJ	%	PJ	%	PJ	%	PJ	%	PJ	%
Total primary energy	3939.8	100.00	3937.8	100.00	3927.1	100.00	4166.6	100.00	4137.1	100.00
Hard coal	2056.7	52.20	1932.2	49.07	1865.0	47.49	2002.5	48.06	1996.9	48.27
Lignite	516.9	13.12	518.9	13.18	538.5	13.71	530.7	12.74	506.5	12.24
Crude oil	742.0	18.83	770.1	19.56	771.8	19.65	851.7	20.44	854.7	20.66
Natural gas	509.4	12.93	521.6	13.25	545.5	13.89	551.4	13.23	552.2	13.35
Other	114.8	2.91	195.0	4.95	206.3	5.25	230.3	5.53	226.8	5.48

Source: Energy Statistics 2006, 2007 published by the Polish Central Statistical Office, Warsaw 2008, ISSN: 1896-7809

— Kpalion^(talk)

BP, which is the best (free) info available in one place (http://www.bp.com/productlanding.do?categoryId=6929&contentId=7044622) says 60.5% in 2007. DOR (HK) (talk) 05:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As to ARD's reliability, they probably meant electric power production. According to the source I quoted above, 95.06 percent of Polish electricity came from coal-fired power plants in 2003. In 2006, the figure stood at 93.63 percent. — Kpalion^(talk) 08:27, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cabbage

I cannot find this in either article - what is the difference between Kimchi and Sauerkraut?

As the first sentences of those articles say, Kimchi is pickled, Sauerkraut is fermented. --Tango (talk) 11:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover, their origins are different: kimchi is a Korean dish, while saurkraut is German. Nyttend (talk) 12:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kimchi is also pretty spicy while Sauerkraut is, strangely enough, sour. Livewireo (talk) 13:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to Tango's assessment, there are versions of either Kimchi and Sauerkraut which are pickled and/or fermented. Both use pickled/fermented cabbage at their core, but as noted; Kimchi is frequently heavily spiced. Sauerkraut is also used as a condiment while Kimchi is frequently a side dish or main course. Most importantly, they are independently created dishes. That the Koreans and the Germans both created pickled cabbage dishes independently is the key; merging the two ideas is a bad idea. Consider the similarity between Moo Shu and Fajitas or between Ravioli and Pierogi or any of a number of other dishes. Similar dishes often have indepenant development in multiple cultures. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was also under the impression that the cabbage used is of fairly different varieties ("regular" cabbage in the one case and Chinese cabbage in the other). Or was I wrong? Can kimchi be made from regular cabbage as well? TomorrowTime (talk) 21:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can certainly pickle regular cabbages with spices, but it would be a different dish. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 04:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Practically speaking, Kimchi and Saurkraut are very different. This might have a lot to do with spices, but you'd never get the two mixed up tasting them. Shadowjams (talk) 09:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another important difference is that while there is little variation between sauerkraut recipes, kimchi comes in many varied forms and can be made from almost any vegetable, not just cabbage. Cucumber, scallion and radish varieties are all common. —D. Monack ^talk 09:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Abatement

Is "abatement" properly used in the history section for Bay County, Michigan? The section states that someone pled abatement because they were being tried in another county for a crime allegedly committed in Bay County: the defendent said that the other county's court therefore didn't have jurisdiction. Reading abatement in pleading, I couldn't find anything of this sort: it discusses matters related to the person of the defendant, and there's nothing about such a plea because someone is being tried by a court that doesn't have jurisdiction over them. Do we need to revise the Bay County article or expand the abatement article? Nyttend (talk) 12:40, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't done any research, but in 1858 Michigan might have still been a writ pleading state, and even if not, abatement might have been actually what was used under the specific circumstances. I would suggest pulling up the actual Michigan supreme court article and seeing what they say the procedural history was. Shadowjams (talk) 09:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which was worse the First or Second Red Scares?

The Second Red Scare and McCarthyism is more popular in public imagination, but the government was far more persecutorty in violating civil liberties during the 1st Red scare. Certainly far more violent repression and people were arrested and killed during the 1st. --Gary123 (talk) 13:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it should probably be noted that just because one was "worse" in some ways doesn't mean it had as much affect overall on the culture or atmosphere. The two "Scares" were very different in their targets—the first one targeted a bunch of self-proclaimed radicals who were already pretty far removed from the mainstream, whereas the second targeted those who were part of the mainstream power (politicians, aides, actors, scientists, academics, etc.). That's part of why the second one looms so high—it seemed like the sort of thing anyone could get caught up in by hanging around the wrong people, signing up for the wrong newspaper, being uncomfortable with taking certain oaths; not just those people who were self-described revolutionaries and agitators. As a result, the second one was more likely to have a strong affect on how "regular" people acted on a day-to-day basis. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 14:01, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(For the interested reader, archive hunter, and link fetishist's sake): Red Scare, First Red Scare, McCarthyism. ---Sluzzelin talk 18:02, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Documents

I am really interested in perusing some of the source materials for our accounts of major historical events. Is there a general repository somewhere (ideally scanned online) with this kind of information (more ideally with English translations)? For example, we know much of Roman history from written records at the time. Where can I see ancient roman manuscripts? And what about earlier civilizations? Thanks! TheFutureAwaits (talk) 18:07, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wdl.org has a number of items like that. 207.241.239.70 (talk) 18:48, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you are specifically looking for Roman documents a good place is the Philodemus Project which restores the library of the Villa of the Papyri in Herculaneum. Especially since this project is still being worked at and has resulted in the discovery of some very interesting and previously unknown ancient books on Epicureanism. --Saddhiyama (talk) 23:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oxyrhynchus also has lots of ancient papyri. Generally though, ancient documents haven't survived, except in medieval (or later) copies. There are numerous publishers who print edited versions of those, in the original language and often with English translations, or exclusively in English. Oxford Classical Texts publishes Latin editions, Loeb Classical Library publishes Greek and Latin with translations, Penguin usually publishes just translations. Say you want to read a major source of Roman history like Livy's Ab Urbe condita - well, not all of it survives, and what does survive comes from various places (Oxyrhyncus, plus later ancient and medieval copies). Fortunately someone has already done the hard work for you, and you can read published Latin or English editions of Livy without having to look at the original manuscripts. If you really want to look at scanned manuscripts, there are places online that you can do that, and a large enough academic library should have some on microfilm; but they will be written in strange ancient and medieval handwriting that you probably won't be able to read at first glance, and they won't always have transcriptions or translations attached. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:16, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

World Digital Library is the source pointed out by the anonymous editor above. It is only is its very beginning but has potential. Rmhermen (talk) 15:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literaturedoesn't have the original tablets photographed / scanned, but it does the next best thing. It has a transliteration of the text, an English translation and a bibliography for each section. 152.16.16.75 (talk) 10:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As Adam Bishop stated not apart from epigraphy and the occasional fragments, not a lot of original Roman documents have survived. Besides the two major finds already mentioned I can only come up with the Vindolanda tablets as a source of a good collection of Roman documents (some of them can be seen online here). --Saddhiyama (talk) 10:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some cool answers, thanks! TheFutureAwaits (talk) 23:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish hymn

There is a well known Jewish hymn that begins (phonetically) "Ain kal-lah hey-nu". What is it actually called? Thanks. 207.241.239.70 (talk) 18:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ein Keloheinu. -- BenRG (talk) 20:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!! 207.241.239.70 (talk) 22:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I was wondering were I might find the name of the tartan (plaid) kilt worn by Sir Harry Lauder of Scotland. Programmer13 (talk) 22:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It does not appear that he restricted himself to one. In fact some of his sheet music covers show multiple images of him - each time in a different tartan.[1] Rmhermen (talk) 00:28, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If he wore based on his name then it should be Lauder Tartan. (http://www.scotsconnection.com/product.asp?P_ID=518&numLanguageID=1). It may also be worth looking on here (http://www.scotclans.com) though my (brief) search didn't find a lauder-clan-tartan unfortunately. ny156uk (talk) 08:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Scottish Tartan World Register has three different Lauder tartans. Rmhermen (talk) 14:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Black Death quote

Many years ago I read some book which quoted a monk in a plague-ridden village who supposedly left a blank page at the end of his account of the Black Death and wrote something to the effect that if any human survived, they should finish the story. Can anybody fine me the quote or a reference? Thanks, --S.dedalus (talk) 23:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're referring to John Clyn. Check out the quote in the "Notable entries" section of his article. Them From Space 02:16, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's it! Thanks! --S.dedalus (talk) 03:08, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OT: I just read that book (Doomsday Book, by Connie Willis) recently. I loved it! Steewi (talk) 01:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're not alone: it split the Hugo Award with A Fire Upon the Deep. —Tamfang (talk) 03:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]