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.
I just got the Xperia Play from Best Buy last night, and now, I'm hoping that with the many thousands (really, where are the stats on the # out there now?) of apps available for download, there will be plenty that'll help users make some quick bucks. (They don't all have to be quick, of course.)
As we've been mentioning a lot here recently, there's no such thing as a get rich quick scheme that's just sitting around for the taking. You're not going to download the Free Money app and suddenly you're making money for very little effort.
That said, apps that help you make money could be almost anything. I'd say that most people use google calendar for business. That usually comes with the phone. Note-taking apps, of course. If you make your living off of ebay, there are a number of apps to help you manage that from your phone. If you manage a warehouse, maybe a barcode scanner would save you time and money.
Basically, there's a whole category of business apps, most of those help people make money. Making a list would be silly. APL (talk) 04:49, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, APL, but there was no "business" category. (Closest was "finance," but that typically keeps track of finances.) Therefore, would anyone help me find a business app anyhow? Thanks. --70.179.169.115 (talk) 18:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Excluding the establishment cost, how much money (minimum amount) is necessary to run an economic policy think tank (of moderate to high influence in the area they operate) in the US? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 999Zot (talk • contribs) 05:48, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The two best known US policy think tanks are the Heritage Foundation and the Brookings Institute. In 2007, the Heritage Foundation had an annual budget of $75 million whereas the Brookings Institute’s 2009 budget was $80 million. The latter had about 250 ‘experts’ on staff; can’t find a number for the other. However, these are not "of moderate to high influence in the area they operate," but very high and very broadly spread (in subjects covered). DOR (HK) (talk) 08:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You can run a Leninist party on about 50% full employment within the party. Influence depends more on the quality of the intellectuals and their capacity to propound their work. The UK SWP is an example of a party with at least three intellectuals of world significance in the left. (Then again, Autonomists gets by without a party). Influence largely depends on winning an ideological battle for control over capitalists, their stooges, or in a country with a social democratic movement (uh,…I can't really think of one, maybe China's workers movement) over the social democratic intellectuals and labour aristocracy. ———The last time I am aware that this was effective was when the Communist Party of Australia sold the idea of class collaboration to the ALP and Trade Union movement during the Accord period. Outside of such rare examples on the left, you can look at the uptake Fifelfoo (talk) 08:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Many, if not all, economic policy think tanks are ginger groups for a particular political economy. Leninist organisations set a lower boundary of marketised cost price for operating such an economics ginger group as their primary assets base and costs are human experience and time; and, their reliance on volunteers rather than employees for secretarial services, etc. Also, as these groups are reliant on dues, tithes and bequests from the poor, their capital poor position and poor access to capitalisation indicates that they are more likely to be run efficiently on a per dollar basis. If you're seeking per output efficiency, you'd want to look to the Chicago School of Economics and their involvement in Pinochet's government. Fifelfoo (talk) 12:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have any references, but we can get some idea by general reasoning. The main cost for a think tank is going to be people. You're going to need several reputable experts (let's say 5, each earning $100k). Various other staff (junior researchers, press/communications people, secretaries - let's say 10 people earning an average of $50k each). So that's a total payroll of $1m. Add on the various other costs of having staff (office space, health insurance, taxes, etc.) and you're probably at around $2m. There will then be various things I've forgotten and my numbers were very rough anyway, so let's say the minimum is somewhere in the low millions of dollars a year. To have a reasonably high influence, you probably need to be in the 10s of millions. --Tango (talk) 14:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, while I couldn't find a general reference it is easy enough to find out the expenditure of individual think tanks. For example, I picked the Aspen Institute at random from the beginning of the List of think tanks in the United States and found on their annual report that they spend about $65m a year. You could do the same thing for some other think tanks and get an idea of the distribution of expenditure. That they have a Wikipedia article is evidence that they are at least moderately influential. --Tango (talk) 14:31, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are specific limits on political involvement for 501(c)(3) non profits in the US. From what I can tell most think tanks in the US work within these limits, I guess the benefits of 501(c)(3) being too great but it wouldn't surprise me if some are 501(c)(4). Although it seems more common for think tanks to start 501(c)(4) affliates for activities they aren't allowed to engage in, particularly after Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission[1]. 501(c)(4) still have tax exemption in a number of areas but there are some were they have to pay tax. (Although the biggest issue is probably that their donors have to pay gift tax were relevant.) Note that even 501(c)(3) may not be completely tax exempt, if they are private foundations they still have to pay tax on investment income [2]. However since there are further limits on private foundations I would guess most think tanks apply to be public charities. I don't know if 501(c)(3) public charities are completely tax exempt although I would guess taxes aren't a major part of their operating expenses (excluding income tax for staff which I presume we aren't talking about since they can be considered part of the staff wages). Nil Einne (talk)
I was thinking of things like social security (I believe the employer has to pay half of it, which will include non-profit employers). In the UK, there are also rates (which charities get a discount on, but still have to pay some of). I don't know if there is an equivalent in the US. --Tango (talk) 19:42, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Lord's Resistance Army is no doubt guilty of horrific war crimes and crimes against humanity. But would this be defined as "terrorism"? I'm focusing on terrorists here, not the other nasty creatures in this world. Eliyohub (talk) 07:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well our own article says "The LRA is currently proscribed as a terrorist organization by the United States" so yes at least one country thinks the organisation is. Whether these specific people are likely to be considered terrorists I can't say. Edit: In the specific case of Joseph Kony our article on him says "After the September 11th attacks the United States declared the Lord's Resistance Army a terrorist group and Joseph Kony a terrorist" and "On August 28, 2008, the United States Treasury Department placed Kony on its list of "Specially Designated Global Terrorists," a designation that carries financial and other penalties. It is not known whether Kony has any assets that are affected by this designation" Nil Einne (talk) 11:54, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Leo Burt does seem to meet the definition of "terrorist". Do the others? Who are the most wanted non-Muslim terrorists in the U.S.? Eliyohub (talk) 07:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have a problem with the seeming assumption behind the title of this section. Some Muslim friends of mine argue that those committing acts of terrorism in the name of Islam are breaching the philosophies of their religion, and have therefore lost the right to call themselves Muslim. So should they be counted as non-Muslim? HiLo48 (talk) 07:49, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They claim to be acting on their version of Islamic beliefs, albeit versions which many other Muslims may not share, or may even vocally oppose. In that sense, they are different from those who claim other motivations for their terrorist acts. As I said, my intent is not to besmirch Muslims. It's to find out who the most-wanted terrorists are amongst those who hold other motivations. Eliyohub (talk) 10:38, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just as the KKK claim to be Christian. The fact that mainstream Christians don't regard the KKK as "real" Christians doesn't really matter. I also doubt there was ever a fatwa against Osama bin Laden, as that would be practically begging to get assassinated. OBL was a thoroughly evil guy who authored a significantly heightened fear and hatred of Islam; but he was a Muslim nonetheless. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 15:20, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Bugs, fatwa are rarely a death sentence. As our article notes, they are mostly mundane. I imagine there are parts of Islam that have rejected bin Laden's approach sufficiently to have made a ruling with a religious message against it. A Muslim he remains, though. I don't want to digress too much from the OP's question. Grandiose(me, talk, contribs) 15:34, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is that it's perfectly clear what the OP wants to know, but then the waters get muddied over arguments about whether someone is a "real" Muslim or not. If someone says they are of a given religion, then they are of that religion, whether mainstream adherents of that religion like it or not. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 15:48, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Somewhat correct. I should have said "non-Islamist". However, the PKK is socialist in ideology, which isn't exactly pro-religion of any sort. (Though some would see socialism as a quasi-religion of its' own). Eliyohub (talk) 10:43, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Which was the first country to be called an Empire? The Roman empire throughout its actual existance was always considered a republic, if a not very democratic one, and those that followed were largely attempts to copy rome, though this time more clearly monarchical and hereditary. But when did the actual term itself come into use?
Also, whilst I'm here, the article on Gordian III mentions that he opened the Gates of the Temple of Janus late in his reign, does anyone know when they had been closed? I suspect after he succeeded, unless civil wars were considered not to count. The article on the wars with Persia, though lacking in detail, suggests that war was ongoing throughout this time.
Clearly the answer is the Roman Empire (Imperium Romanum), but it is difficult to pin down the date when this happened. As I understand it, the problem is that the Latin word Imperium gradually shifted its meaning. Originally it referred to the powers held by the Imperius, or Emperor, but gradually it developed a connotation that included the geographical area ruled by the Emperor, and over time this connotation became its primary meaning. Looie496 (talk) 16:52, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The answer to your second question is less clear, but Vespasian certainly marked universal peace by closing the doors of the Temple of Janus in 75, so we have to ask whether they were later opened. The historian Jona Lendering argues that they were not, in spite of the large number of wars fought between 75 and 241. His argument runs that any emperor after Vespasian who had closed the temple doors would have made a propaganda coup of it by issuing coins showing the event. We have no such coins from emperors between Vespasian and Gordian III, therefore there was no closing of the doors after 75, therefore they remained closed from 75 to 241. I'm not sure if the argument holds water though. There are coins of Nero showing the temple with closed doors, but I'm not aware of any issued by Vespasian, who certainly had the chance, so maybe some later emperor turned down the same opportunity. All the same, it's safe to say that there's no historical record of the temple doors being either opened or closed between Vespasian and Gordian III. --Antiquary (talk) 19:41, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you are looking for a name etymologically related to the English word empire, then there is at least one earlier state with a name meaning, roughly, "empire", namely the Seleucid Empire, or Ἀρχή Σελεύκεια, in which ἀρχή has the meaning "empire". According to Lewis and Short, the word imperium came to refer to the Roman state during the time of Augustus. (Incidentally, the Latin for "emperor" is not *imperius but imperator.) Marco polo (talk) 00:55, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the concept of an Empire is much earlier than the Roman Empire, that is of a multinational state ruled by a monarchical or autocratic ruler. Of course, the word Empire is distinctly from the Roman Empire, so that is technically the first empire, and most European states which used the word Empire in their title (Holy Roman, Austrian, Russian, French, German, etc.) claim at least some mythological succession to the original Roman Empire traditionally founded by Augustus in 27 BC. But there were clearly earlier states which were structured similarly to Rome, at least broadly speaking, besides the empires of Alexander the Great and the Diadochi (already mentioned Seleucid empire above), there were the Chinese empires of the Qin Dynasty and Han Dynasty which predate Rome, there was the Persian Achaemenid Empire, which predated Alexander by centuries, and the Akkadian Empire which predated him by millenia. Indeed, if you want the earliest state which is usually described historically as an Empire, I'd go with the Akkadian Empire. --Jayron3219:53, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any sacred texts outside the Judeo-Christian tradition that include history books?
One issue is the concept of "history books". History, the modern discipline which claims to produce reasonably true accounts of the past emerges in the 19th Century with Ranke. Prior to this histories were often extremely loose and free with their claims. In particular, most "histories" produced in the Axial age as part of religious texts were substantially mythic, rather than historic. One could suggest that Journey to the West has historic features... ...but much like Samuel and Kings, it is more "based on a true story." Fifelfoo (talk) 01:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Journey to the West can only in very loose terms be called a "religious text", since it was intended to be an entertaining novel which distilled oral traditions of theatre and story telling. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 08:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strangely enough Nasreddin's stories are an entertaining compendium of distilled oral traditions of story telling, and they also work quite well as religious texts. Fifelfoo (talk) 13:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's not the point. Wu Cheng'en was a novelist, his work was a novel, he didn't hold himself out to be a religious leader and I would argue that very few would read his work as proselytising. If you saw Journey to the West as a "religious text" then you will encounter some thorny problems of, for example, what religion it is a text of. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 08:22, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The question is very vague, but many religions include historical (although not necessarily accurate) accounts of their founders, and of the spread and development of the religion. In Islam, the Hadith combines history and teaching, describing the life of Mohammed, which was certainly not short of historically-relevant deeds. Buddhism doesn't have a clear canon of religious texts, but some texts that are important to certain groups, such as the Mahavamsa, are poeticised history. The Wikipedia article on Shinto says "There is no core sacred text in Shinto, as the Bible is in Christianity or Qur'an is in Islam. Instead there are books of lore and history which provide stories and background to many Shinto beliefs.". Mandaean scriptures apparently include history too, although that religion is arguably part of Judao-Christian tradition. Wikipedia has a lot of info on different religions, so you could look up other faiths. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:35, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I uploaded this image to Commons yesterday, but I need some help identifying the aircraft. It is titled simply "Biplane, crash." There is no exact date, but the time frame is 1900-20. Apparently, the plane came from Fort Brown. BurtAlert (talk) 18:35, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The markings appear to be the roundels of the Imperial Russian Air Force. If that's correct, it's very likely to be French built. It's quite big and I can just make out a second cockpit for an observer. I probably could have told you straight off when I was 13! Alansplodge (talk) 19:07, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's one of these. Unfortunately, that photo doesn't give the type number. Not a Jenny, though - the engine fairing isn't pointed enough.Tevildo (talk) 21:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Two different articles use the same citation to claim two different things, the origin/not-origin of the name "Balin" in Tolkien's works
Balin says: As with almost all Dwarves in The Hobbit, Tolkien took the name Balin from the "Catalogue of the Dwarves", found in the Poetic Edda.
Gandalf says: (The name "Gandalf") is taken from the same source as all the other Dwarf names (save Balin) in The Hobbit: the "Catalogue of Dwarves" in the Völuspá. (The Völuspá is the opening poem in the Poetic Edda.)
The source for both statements is Solopova, Elizabeth (2009), Languages, Myths and History: An Introduction to the Linguistic and Literary Background of J.R.R. Tolkien's Fiction, p. 20.
I have skimmed the Wikisource translation and find no mention of "Balin" but I have no idea if the source is accurate. I do not have access to Dr. Solopova's book. I hope someone knowledgeable in either the "Poetic Edda" or Tolkien, or with access to the source, can look into it. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 19:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Balin" isn't in the Edda. See [3], section B11-16, for the rest of the dwarf names (and Gandalf). Note that Þ = "Th" in modern script. Tevildo (talk) 19:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the link: Balin was not in the list. Yet how does one go about cancelling/deleting a citation without a comparable one to hand? Solopova holds a doctorate in medieval languages. Without her book at hand, what can I use to say, "Balin is not in the 'Catalogue of Dwarves'"? Would linking to this discussion to the Balin talk page be enough? 71.234.215.133 (talk) 02:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Today, scholars believe the Dvergatal to be an interpolation, but it's still included in my translation. Since we know that Balin isn't in that section, we can assume that the citation in Gandalf is correct and that someone made a mistake on the Balin article. I'd advise you to remove it with a note of "see talk page", where you can copy this discussion as an explanation. Nyttend (talk) 04:03, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have a hypothetical question; so it's Manchester, and there's this guy, let's call him SJM, and his wife, RM. SJM and RM can't have children, and want to adopt, but although SJM is a successful local businessman, social services aren't too impressed by their lifestyle. However, RM's sister KP has had a small child, MT. KP agrees to allow MT to be brought up by SJM and RM. SJM and RM also give KP some money. Can SJM and RM formally adopt MT more easily as he/she is a family member? Is there a problem with SJM and RM giving KP money? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.159.40 (talk) 20:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"The reference desk will not answer (and will usually remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or request medical opinions, or seek guidance on legal matters. Such questions should be directed to an appropriate professional, or brought to an internet site dedicated to medical or legal questions". AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Without commenting on any legal issues (and I suspect that there are legal issues), what happens if, a few years from now, KP decides she wants the child to know that she is the child's mother (perhaps by informing the child when she is alone with the child) and perhaps even wants to take over parental responsibility for the child that she bore? Marco polo (talk) 00:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I assume that you are reffering to a well known UK soap storyline. The bladishments of a script writer do not always follows legal niceties.
Does anyone know of a list that gives deaths in World War II by year and not by nationality? Every list I can find (including those on Wikipedia) lists casualties only by nationality with no reference as to when they died, which isn't useful for my purposes. --NellieBly (talk) 21:15, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are you limiting your query to combatants... or are civilian casualties included (example: Londoner's killed in the Blitz or Japanese killed by atomic bomb)? Are victims of the Holocaust included? Blueboar (talk) 11:16, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not fussy, as long as the list is clear as to whether civilians are included or not. I'll check with the CWGC, Kittybrewster, thanks for the suggestion. --NellieBly (talk) 22:37, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
