Humanities desk
< December 18	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 20 >

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

December 19

Stolen credit card used at USPS

I lost my credit card and it was used at the local post office. My card company wants a copy of a police report to remove the charges. The police said that I had to file a report with the Postal Inspection Service since it was used at USPS. I went to the local postmaster, and she pulled the tape, showing two teenage girls buying A LOT of books of stamps and an American Express gift card, altogether about $500 worth of stuff. I filled out the mail fraud form on the Postal Inspector's website, but it didn't give me an option of printing a copy of the report. Anyone else here ever have this problem? Am I screwed? Anybody have any idea what two teeny boppers would be doing with all those stamps? 198.228.235.168 (talk) 02:04, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like a request for legal advice. Please contact the local postal inspector and/or a lawyer for information on how to proceed. --Jayron32 02:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jayron - I'm not sure this is legal advice, just advice about dealing with the Post Office's bureaucracy. IP, go to your local post office, tell them you filed the report (hopefully you retained some type of case number), and ask for a hard copy. They'll probably do it by mail, so don't expect fast service.

However, the post office (while slow) is very uptight about mail fraud, so you can expect that they will take this seriously. Remember that what these girls did is almost certainly a felony, and postal inspectors (while nowhere near as 'glamourous' as FBI agents), have all the same powers and resources at their disposal. --Ludwigs2 04:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice Ludwig. I already know what my options are legally, I just wondered if anyone else here had any experience dealing with the postal service with this kind of problem. 198.228.235.168 (talk) 04:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why stamps? We can only speculate but stamps are one of the few things you can buy that are easily sold essentially at face value (and take up little space). You can't buy certified checks, money orders, bearer bonds or other negotiable instruments easily with a stolen credit card. You can buy electronics, jewelry, etc. but such items immediately go down from retail value, having to be fenced at a mark down. Stamps are almost as good as cash.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are they, though? Is there a resale market in stamps? Where could I show up with a bunch of "Forever" stamps and actually redeem them for cash? Where could I trade $500 in stamps for a new TV? I'm not so sure about this. Maybe I'm in with the wrong crowd, but having $500 worth of stamps would not translate into have $500 worth of cash. It would be terribly time consuming and difficult to convert those back into cash, and nobody would accept them as straight barter. Because in the end, postage stamps aren't cash. They're postage stamps. And who needs more than a few books of those around? But maybe I'm missing out on a postage stamp laundering operation somewhere. --Mr.98 (talk) 02:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You never know with teenagers. maybe they want to write Christmas letters to everyone in their school; maybe they are stocking up for a club. $500 dollars in stamps is a bit more than 1000 letters, which is a lot but not an impossibly large number for a couple of kids on a mission, particularly if they're bulk-mailing some leaflet or invite. --Ludwigs2 08:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they found the two culprits, it was two sisters from Florida up here visiting their family for Christmas. Apparently their grandma saw them in a still scene from the surveillence tape that the postmaster had hanging, and she made them turn themselves in with the stuff they bought/stole. Come to find out they tried it at the local Krogers too, but it was declined and they kept the card there. Haven't found out what they were doing with those stamps though, maybe they wanted to send their friends postcards from our quaint little town nobody's heard of? 198.228.235.133 (talk) 15:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And it was $300 in stamps; $200 of it went on an Anerican Express gift card. 198.228.235.133 (talk) 15:33, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr.98 Yes they are. First of all, at my small office we buy $88 in stamps every week. We would certainly pay 0.95¢ on the dollar if someone offered (and we were less scrupulous). Stamps were at one time used as currency. Today, they are easily sold because unlike most products they have a fixed value and are fungible. Little more needs to be said other than that you can you can even sell them on eBay for near face value. Can you think of any other item that you could do this with? Any store that re-sells stamps, convenience stores/marts, groceries, bodegas may work also. If they already sell stamps, any discount from face value that they buy a lot for is all gravy.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:54, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

USA presidential veto override

To override a presidential veto in the USA, is the two-thirds majority required simple or absolute? --130.216.172.27 (talk) 04:42, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant clause of the U.S. constitution is Article One, Section 7: Bills, Clause 3: Presidential veto:

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

Our Supermajority#Two-thirds majority article points out the difference between simple and absolute majority, without indication which applies to U.S. presidential veto overrides. This usgovinfo.about.com states that "A two-thirds majority vote of the Members present is required to override a presidential veto." suggesting a simple two-thirds majority. Can we find a better reference for that? -- 203.82.91.129 (talk) 06:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, a better reference is Veto Override Procedure in the House and Senate (by Elizabeth Rybicki of the loc) which states, "A vetoed bill can become law if two-thirds of the Members voting in each chamber agree, by recorded vote, a quorum being present, to repass the bill and thereby override the veto of the President." also indicating a simple two-thirds majority. -- 203.82.91.129 (talk) 06:24, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Searching further, I've not discovered if the simple two-thirds majority is spelled out explicitly elsewhere in the constitution or supporting documents, if it is understood to have been the founders intent, or if it is just a matter of tradition. -- 203.82.91.129 (talk) 08:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Veto override article pointed to this item[1] Note on page 35, item 2530: "The House overrode the veto on September 19, 1996 by a vote of 285 yeas to 137 nays. (142 Cong. Rec. 23851)." That number 285 is more than 2/3 of the total number voting (422) but is short of what 2/3 of the full House would be (290/435). Hence it's the members present, not the total members. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:29, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is correct. Those who refuse to vote are not included in vote at all. 2/3 of those who do vote are all that is required. This has been used for many things in Congress. Assume you want a bill to pass, but voting on it will cause a problem come election time. You refuse to vote and get someone else to vote for the bill. Then, you tell your people that you "didn't vote for" the bill. They assume you voted against it - which isn't true. So, those who refuse to vote to override a veto can claim they didn't vote for (or against) the veto override when it comes time for an election. -- kainaw ™ 20:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there the option to abstain from voting? This would be formally recorded as an abstention, and clearly a different action from voting either for or against. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 03:05, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but you avoid that by being absent for the vote. Either way, it becomes a campaign point: "I did not vote for that bill you didn't like." and "I did not vote against that bill you did like." -- kainaw ™ 13:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I meant physically turning up but deliberately (maybe even pointedly) refusing to take part in the voting procedure. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 17:28, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. The way they abstain is to vote "present". It is neither for or against the bill. So, there are really four possible votes: Yea, Nay, Present, Absent. Further, the President has three possible ways to accept a law from Congress: Accept, Veto, Abstain. If he abstains, he agrees to enforce it (which is all he can do - agree to enforce it or disagree to enforce it), but he can later say he didn't accept it. It is all meant for the purpose of misleading voters. -- kainaw ™ 17:43, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now we know. Thanks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 03:09, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the U.S. President abstains from signing or vetoing a bill, it becomes law in ten days only if Congress is still in session at that time. From the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 7:

If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a Law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a Law.

If Congress is not in session to vote, such a pocket veto cannot be overridden, so it is more powerful than a regular veto as it requires the introduction of a new bill in the next session. Our article describes how it is not yet settled law how long the adjournment must be for it to "prevent" the bills return, and this question came into play as recently as four years ago. -- ToE 23:16, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

memories of a bygone business

I'm trying to find some memorabilia with the RCA logo on them. Where is a good place to start?24.90.204.234 (talk) 08:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If all you care about is the logo, and you're not looking for official merchandise, then you can create your own memorabilia at Cafepress. You would need to find a high resolution scan of the logo online which you would then upload to the site and thereby create your own merchandise. inb4 "copyright violation" --Viennese Waltz 08:46, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do care about the logo, and I'm looking for official merchandise, to tell you the truth.24.90.204.234 (talk) 09:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just did a search at eBay for "RCA logo" and a number of items came up. Some more recently produced than others. Might get some antiques there. Dismas|^(talk) 09:11, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not looking for antiques. Actually, I'm looking for memorabilia with the RCA Corporation logo, to tell you the truth.24.90.204.234 (talk) 19:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Street number required for defunct Belfast pub

Would anybody happen to know the exact address of the defunct Chlorane Bar in Gresham Street, Belfast? I need the info for an article, thank you.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Wikipedia article: "The Chlorane Bar was located at 23 Gresham Street in Belfast's city centre close to the Smithfield Market. " 88.8.69.150 (talk) 14:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, would number 23 be where a large parking lot is today?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently not. Take a look at Google Maps: [[2]] 88.8.69.150 (talk) 15:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to me that it would have stood on what is now the very southern end of that parking lot, as the tattoo parlor just to the south bears an address of No. 25 (Google street view, on the painted sign on the building's side, facing the parking lot), and the shops farther to the south are numbers 27 and 31. Deor (talk) 15:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Languages of the Jeberti

Hi,

Jeberti people#Language says (without giving its source) that: "The Jeberti in the Horn of Africa speak Tigrinya, Somali, Amharic and Arabic", whereas, according to this (emphasis added): "The Jeberti (Jiberti/Djiberti/Jeberty) people are Tigrinya-speaking Muslims" (based in part on [3], which only says, without elaborating: "the Jeberty, a Muslim Tigrigna-speaking group"). Is there information available on the extent to which the Jeberti speak languages other than Tigrinya?

Thanks. Apokrif (talk) 14:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The truth lies probably somewhere in between. Just like you speak French, English, Europanto &al., many Jeberti people probably speak several languages, too. As for the article; since the currently has no source for the additional languages, so I'll remove them and add your reference. Thanks for providing it. — Sebastian 06:19, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Variability in crime rates

Why do crime rates tend to remain consistent throughout a given country, at least when we compare cities to cities, and rural areas to rural areas? Australia differs from the US, but most cities throughout the US seem to have much higher murder rates especially than Australian cities. Why the (seeming) consistency? IBE (talk) 17:32, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seemingly, murder rates are more affected by national factors - the crime's definition, statistics collection, policing and sentencing policy, national, ethnic and cultural concerns - than local ones, such as where the offender lives or local policing policy. Given the examples I've listed, I think that is entirely consistent with what you'd expect. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 17:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The OP's statement is demonstratedly not true for the U.S. Looking at United States cities by crime rate, you can compare cities of differing population and find wildly different numbers. The violent crime rate in Atlanta, Georgia is twice what it is in Portland, Oregon, but the cities have almost the same population. Buffalo, New York and Henderson, Nevada have almost identical populations, but Buffalo has over six times as much violent crime. So if you are going to ask questions like "Why do crime rates remain consistent throughout a given country?" then your supposition behind the question, that the crime rates are consistent, had better be true. It is demonstratedly not, ergo, the question is not answerable. If you want to know what factors are well correlated to crime rate, in a general sense, the Wikipedia article Criminology (as well as any external sources on the topic) would be a good place to start. But your initial question can't be answered directly, because it is plainly wrong. It is a fallacy of the Complex question type, akin to "When did you stop beating your wife?" --Jayron32 17:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

However, even if there is a high variability between cities in a given nation, it's definitely the case that the average crime rate is far higher in some nations than others, and it may be the case that every major city in nation A has a higher crime rate than every major city in nation B. One key differences is the availability of guns, particularly handguns, to criminals. As mentioned previously, how crimes are classified also matters. In some US states, public urination can be classified as a sex crime, for example. In some Sharia law nations, no woman had better report a rape unless she has several male witnesses, or she will be accused of seduction and adultery, and may be shunned by her family, in any case. So, you'd expect rape statistics to be quite low there. StuRat (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there may be legal factors regarding enforcement and prophylactic steps, that can affect crime rates, but it's ^{[citation needed]} time if you want to start pointing out specific examples. List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate is a good place to muse over possible correlations. I'd rather we not get sidetracked by specific causes. Relative poverty seems to be a reoccurring theme, whether it's comparing U.S. cities or countries. Shadowjams (talk) 18:40, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That list seems to indicate that an uneven distribution of wealth may be more relevant than absolute wealth. Many of those nations high on the list are "playgrounds for the rich", such as the Jamaica, Nevis and St. Kitts, Trinidad and Tobago, and the Bahamas: List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#2010s. I suspect that lesser crimes, like theft, are even more dependent on wealth inequality. StuRat (talk) 19:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, if the OP were interested in why, on average, crime rates in the U.S. are higher than in Australia, that would be answerable. But, that isn't what they asked. They asked why the crime rates in the U.S. were consistent. They are not. --Jayron32 18:27, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The last line says "Why the (seeming) consistency ?", which leaves the door open to the idea that it only appears that crime rates are consistent. StuRat (talk) 18:30, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't even appear they are consistent. Or seem. Or look like. Or any other synonym. They appear to be completely inconsistent. So one cannot answer why they seem to be consistent if they seem to be elsewise. --Jayron32 18:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Appears" could include how it's portrayed by the media. For example, I've noticed that England loves murder mysteries, and many places have more fictional murders each year than real ones. Also, how much publicity real murders get may vary dramatically by culture. StuRat (talk) 19:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll step in and just clarify the question, single indenting since it's for the sake of everyone. I'm curious about the global situation, and I know full well that there are exceptions to what has always seemed a reasonably general rule. I knew that Washington DC, for example, had a very high murder rate. I compared the U.S. and Australia in the question because it was what came to mind. I made the question brief because I often write long-winded posts that over-clarify, and I'm trying to cut down. I hope people can avoid disputing the accuracy of the question unless it's globally false. "Seeming" was meant to mean that it seems that way to me unless there is evidence that it is globally false. I could have done more background reading, but these sorts of questions usually turn up so much of interest, and curiosity has been getting to me for a while now. IBE (talk) 18:57, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So what's the question? Is it if crime rates are consistent across a country, or is it do countries vary in their consistency? I would imagine there are wild differences in the homogeneity of crime rates depending on country. Larger, more geographically and culturally diverse countries are probably going to be more varied.

But even if that's the basic question, by what metric do we measure consistency of crime rates across a nation? Some statistical test? Is it fair to do that the same way for Japan as it is for the U.S.? We don't seem to have an Australian analogue to United States cities by crime rate, but the Australian Bureau of Statistics says in 4519.0 - Recorded Crime - Offenders, 2009-10, that the crime rate [general rate] in the Northern Territory was 5,090 per 100,000, and in the Australian Capital Territory was 2,900 per 100,000. 175% difference. Compare Dallas, Texas's violent crime rate of 701 (our wiki article is the source) to St. Louis with 1,747. 250% difference. Shadowjams (talk) 19:00, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd expect that the smaller the demographic units are, the more variability will become apparent. So, if you look at it by state, you will get a moderate variability, but if you break down to county, you will see more, and at township, even more. At a small enough level you will see effects from specific events, like a gang war or one person who goes on a killing spree. StuRat (talk) 19:11, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For simplicity, let's break it down only to cities of at least 1 million people, and abandon all rural areas. Then this suggests that the premise of low variability in one country is not nearly as true as I had thought. On the other hand, list of metropolitan areas by intentional homicide shows numerous cities from the same few countries popping up repeatedly; Brazil, Columbia and the U.S. It seems there will be exceptions, so comparing the worst and best cities in one country will defeat the premise. There seems to be some truth in the assumption, although statistics are apparently hard to come by. So the question is either to thoroughly show me the premise is wrong, or to explain the (not huge but noticeable) tendency for crime rates to be consistent for cities within a particular country. Any more info welcome. IBE (talk) 19:33, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nazism and Occultism

Reichskonkordat - this wasn't mentioned in the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism_and_occultism. Think it's relevant because it's an agreement btw The Third Reich and Catholic Church. I understand that this concordant gave Catholic Church control over childhood education. I mention this only because I feel religion is relevant to occultism - especially if the author is going to assert that Hitler was possessed by the devil. Exorcism has always been in the realm of the Catholic Church (at least I think so). I'm sory if this is the wrong forum - I tried to go through all of the help articles - tried the discussion link, but couldn't figure out how to pose a question.

Thank you.

76.102.14.171 (talk) 19:37, 19 December 2011 (UTC)Kim Woo[reply]

The talk page of the article - in this case Talk:Nazism and occultism - is normally a good place for suggestions and questions about what should be in an article. But the Nazis' relations with the Catholic church are covered elsewhere: there is an article Religion in Nazi Germany, and the Reichskonkordat has its own article as well. So I don't think the Konkordat belongs in Nazism and occultism, unless the Church and the Nazis specifically discussed occultism. --Colapeninsula (talk) 23:37, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You raise a question in the Talk (or Discussion) page exactly as you did here. --ColinFine (talk) 23:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Atheism in a novel

Okay, this might be tough for me to explain. So, I'm Christian Orthodox, believe in God, Jesus, etc. And recently I wanted to write a novel that deals with several serious topics, like suicide, homosexuality, and atheism (a character will kill herself, a male is homosexual and is having trouble coming out, and there is a feud between characters when an atheist influences a Catholic to become an atheist.) Could simply writing about a character doubting intelligent design, a God, etc. be enough for the Christian (or Catholic) faith to look down on me, even if I'm a devout Christian? Is it a "sin"? I'm just really confused about this, any answers would be great. 64.229.180.189 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really so important what other Christians think? Isn't the main thing what God thinks? But in either case your priest might be more qualified to help you out than the refdesk (at least, if we reformulate the second question as "what the Orthodox Church thinks that God thinks"). --Trovatore (talk) 22:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Many Christians have written books about atheism and doubts about God. Flannery O'Connor's Wise Blood, about an atheist preacher, comes to mind - she was a devout Catholic and the book is a satire, but the central character's beliefs come across vividly. Other Christian writers, including John Milton (Satan in Paradise Lost), C.S. Lewis (The Screwtape Letters), Fyodor Dostoyevsky (The Brothers Karamazov), William Blake (The Marriage of Heaven and Hell), Graham Greene, John Donne, have written works that gave good arguments to atheists or demons or represent characters undergoing serious doubts about their faith - not all of these people were conventional Christians by the standards of their time, but they all had strong religious convictions. Ultimately, it depends on the specifics of the book and on your own conscience, and there's no guarantee that all Christians will feel the same way about your book (indeed it's very likely they won't). --Colapeninsula (talk) 23:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to write about characters you don't have much in common with, you need to learn something about them, and that learning has to come at first hand. The writer who bases a character on what he's learned second-hand (from pop culture, from stereotypes, from his pastor, from teachers) will find it harder to tell a true story (and harder to sell that story) than the writer who goes out there and talks to the type of person he's writing about and learns about his life. Stereotypes exist for a reason: that reason is not because they're true (they rarely are) but because they make it easier to dismiss "the other" as "the lesser". A good writer never sees other people through a third-party lens, nor does he dismiss another person as a collection of stereotypes, mannerisms, and catchphrases. He sees each individual as a person. --NellieBly (talk) 03:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment, Nellie, I believe that the words "you need to" are sadly not true, at least not when worldly success counts as a criterion. I can think of a number of influential books where authors didn't follow that rule. But those were all magic bullets, tools of the devil, leading to anything from hatred to immense human suffering. To the original poster I would recommend following Jesus' example, who opened his heart towards those despised by his community. — Sebastian 09:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When I was a Catholic, I recall the Church seeming quite moderate, and I don't think they have ever taught intelligent design. They certainly didn't teach me creationism, if that can be taken as a rough guide. I was taught that evolution was quite acceptable (and I took communion and had my confirmation, so I had passed the basic stages). Most of the evangelical Protestants I know do not profess an open belief in creationism (admittedly not quite the same thing as i.d.), although belief in the Great Flood is more common. If your book is popular, it will be controversial with someone out there (conversely, if it is controversial, it will be more popular, so maybe you are hoping the answer is "yes"??). From what you are suggesting, probably the homosexual bit will be flagged most quickly by a conservative Christian, especially if you show he is having trouble coming out - it sounds to me like you are treating this as a positive step he is about to make. IBE (talk) 18:25, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of Imereti

Were the Georgian Kings of Imereti forced to convert to Islam like their neighbors in Kakheti and Kartli?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 22:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anything?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 03:55, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]