Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2011 September 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.

September 30

Bear Flag Revolt

Is there any external-link (non-Wikipedia) information on the Bear Flag Revolt? 75.6.243.251 (talk) 01:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Yup... The article gives three external links (and searching "Bear Flag Revolt" on google will give you even more) Blueboar (talk) 02:57, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Economic inequality and racial tension in China and America

I'm writing a paper in college on the July 2009 Ürümqi riots. The article says the immediate cause was the Shaoguan incident, where some migrant Uighur workers were killed in brawl spawned from a lie told by a disgruntled Chinese worker. I would like to explore what led up to this brawl. I have read some papers that mention the economic inequality between the different regions of China. Naturally, the coastal areas have much higher sources of income due to their part in manufacturing and close proximity to exporting routes. Conversely, Xinjiang has a much lower source of income because it is landlocked and a rougher area. These papers mention people traveling from provinces of low income to provinces of higher income to find work. This would explain why the Uighurs came to Guangdong. This was probably a source of resentment to the Chinese since they might have felt like those jobs could have gone to other Han. Having said this, has there ever been a study that looked at racial tension between the Han and these migrant groups? My Chinese is not advanced enough to read any detailed papers, so I hoping to find some good English papers (or books that mention them).

I would also like to find some sources on economically produced racial tension between Americans and Mexicans as well. I figure this would be a good comparison with the above situation. Thanks in advance to anyone who responds. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 01:33, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

What 19th-century ethnic hat is this?

What kind of hat is this? Better yet name the painting that this chromolithograph is based on. Sorry that the image has been collaged over - at least you can see the hats. I feel like I know but now I can't place it. Thanks in advance. Saudade7 02:46, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

A Kokoshnik maybe? Or an Ochipok? There were a wide variety of both of those. It would help to know the ethnicity of the woman in the picture. --Jayron32 03:03, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Jayron32. I think the hat is more pyramid shaped than those. It almost looks like a pyramid with flaps - but the flaps have been pulled up to the top or something. But again I have no idea! If I knew the ethnicity of the woman in the picture I believe I could figure out the hat! It's very definitely a "type" being represented. Thanks for your help ! Saudade7 03:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Pyramind shaped hats make me think of Hennins. Maybe this is a short hennin with the fabric pulled up around it? But Hennins went out of fashion about 400 years before your pic... --Jayron32 03:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's really pyramidal; it might just have a triangle flap of fabric folded up in front... (Hennins were conical.) AnonMoos (talk) 07:20, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it's not a Hennin. Why is this hat so hard to identify? Saudade7 15:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Depending on how you interpret the picture, my suggestions are (in order of most likely to least likely): Kokoshnik, Ushanka, Hennin/Tantour, Ochipok.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 06:25, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Political rivals in UK, Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands and Belgium

Who are the political rivals of Labour Party (U.K.)? Who are the political rivals of PSOE in Spain? Who are the political rivals of Socialist Party in Portugal? Who are the political rivals of Parti Socialiste in France? Who are the political rivals of Socialist Party-Differently in Belgium? Who are the political rivals of Labour Party (PvdA) in the Netherlands? Who are the political rivals of Democratic Party in Italy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.23.85 (talk) 03:09, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

If you go to articles titled "Politics of <blank>" and replace <blank> with the name of the country, you can answer this for yourself without having to have us do all the work for you. For example, a reading of Politics of the United Kingdom would reveal that the primary political opposition the UK Labour Party is the Conservative (Tory) Party. I'll let you find the rest for yourself. --Jayron32 03:14, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

It kind of depends on what kind of rivalry they mean. Social Democratic and Labourite parties haven't been known for their "no enemies to the left" stance. So the Liberals in the UK, or what was Militant / Scottish Socialist Party could count here. In their trade unions, social democrats often face a much harsher rivalry from revolutionary groups than they do in the parliamentary plane. Of course with the way that the Labour Party in the UK have gone, in this sense, their main electoral rival could shortly be the Libdems who occupy similar positions on economic and social issues. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:22, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, but the whole point is the OP can find this at the "Politics of Whatever" articles themselves. --Jayron32 03:24, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

The rival of the Partido Socialista Obrero Español in Spanish politics is the Partido Popular. --Belchman (talk) 10:12, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

assassinated archbishop of Paris

IIRC, it may have been in the 1840s that the archbishop of Paris was assassinated by a priest who was one of his subordinates in the Catholic hierarchy. Does anyone know his name or which year it was or details of the story? Michael Hardy (talk) 06:25, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Denys Auguste Affre was shot in 1848 but the relevant French Wikipedia article states that it is not clear if the shooting was intentional and that the shooter's identity remains unknown.Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 06:36, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

And the next one, Marie-Dominique-Auguste Sibour, was indeed assassinated in 1857 by a subordinate. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 06:45, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

2 questions about Philip Kearny

Hello historico-humanitarians ! I translated the article into WP french ( thanks BTW for the substratum) , & I wonder:

- Kearny's is "one of only two equestrian statues at Arlington " : could not find in "Arlington cemetery" whose is the other equestrian statue ... Can you tell ?

- the article about "Kearny cross" does not give any description or .jpg . What did it look like ?

Thanks a lot beforehand for your questions. PS (as a reward :-)) : an english-speaking article I found on the web speaks repetedly of "chausseurs d'Afrique" instead of "chasseurs d'Afrique" . In french, "chausseur" means "shoe-maker" , & is used in style or fashion world only. T.y. Arapaima (talk) 09:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Re your first question: There is an equestrian statue of John Dill at Arlington (see the image in the "Death" section of the article). Whether it is the only other equestrian statue there, I have no idea. Deor (talk) 11:26, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

And re your second question: The cross is described here as "a cross patte of bronze, 42 mm. in diameter, bearing the words KEARNEY [sic] CROSS, on a ribbon, and, on the reverse, in one line, BIRNEY'S DIVISION; at the bottom, in very small letters, JACOBUS PHILA. It is attached to an oblong open clasp of fasces and suspended by a red ribbon from similar clasp pin". (The photo on that page is of the earlier "Kearny Medal".) An image of a man wearing what is assumed to be a Kearny Cross can be seen here, if you have access to that particular Google Books page. Deor (talk) 11:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Species facti

If you go to Google Books and type in "Species facti" in the title box in advanced search (remember to turn on "full view only"), a long list of predominantly German books from the first half of the 18th century will appear. They seem all to be books containing trial transcripts between prominent members of the Holy Roman Empire (mainly princes, but also clergy or public institutions, it seems).

My question is which function did these particular publications serve? Were they aimed at the general public, the courts or the emperor? In that period most academical law literature in the HRE would have been written in Latin, so something tells me that the first suggestion may be likely. Suggestions for further reading (in German or English) would be most welcome.

PS: I know that "species facti" is a term in Roman law meaning roughly "the facts of the case", and was used in trials by lawyers when presenting their case, my question is mainly about the history and background of this particular type of publications. --Saddhiyama (talk) 10:07, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I get the result that you describe only if I start from Google.de. Incidentally, the books that appear when starting the search from .de are all or mostly in German, although they contain this Latin phrase. If I start from Google.com with my US IP address, I get a list of publications, mainly in English, dealing with court cases over the last three centuries, many of them in Scotland. In both cases, the publications are clearly aimed at a readership with a juristic or legal background. The German-language publications at the top of the search list, when starting from the .de site, all have species facti in their titles. They also tend to have very long titles, as many publications did at that time. I suspect that the term species facti is simply much less likely to occur in the more succinct titles of more modern German legal publications. As to why most of the publications in the search list deal with matters involving corporate or princely entities in the Holy Roman Empire, I would guess that, in the HRE, with its hundreds of distinct polities, each with its own law code, only legal cases at the highest level of jurisdiction would have merited the expense of printing, since they might have been purchased by court and legal offices across the empire, whereas lowlier legal cases, involving, say, the peasant who stole a piglet from his neighbor, would have been handled by the lone court in the tiny Grafschaft (county) that had jurisdiction, where a manuscript would have sufficed as a record, since any precedents would apply only in that court. Marco polo (talk) 15:24, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Money Order

Let's say a person obtains a $500 money order from a grocery store. She then sends it to her sister, being me, with a letter. I then run the letter and $500 money order through the paper shredder and it all becomes small pieces, because as sisters I basically hate her. I do not want anything from my sister, even if she wishes to give me money. She then calls me and asked if I got the letter and $500 money order. I tell her no. At this point I see she is out $500, which is my revenge. Can she get a refund on the money order, now or anytime? Especially since it will never be cashed now! I am always going to say I never received it.--Christie the puppy lover (talk) 11:25, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

It would depend in which country your sister is and what type of money order it was; in Canada you can get refunds on Canada Post money orders subject to certain conditions[1] (see under Enquiries in that link). --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:44, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

She is in Arizonia and bought it from a local grocery store. I am in Ohio. She mailed me the letter and money order. But then what if I was lying and really did not destroy the money order and decided to cash it some 2 or 3 months later after she obtained a refund. The grocery store is then out $500.--Christie the puppy lover (talk) 12:06, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Seems unlikely. If the money order was refunded because it was reported as lost or destroyed then most likely it would have been cancelled and would no longer be valid. So when you try to cash it, it would be rejected. Nil Einne (talk) 12:23, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

To give specific information, the type of money order must be known. For example, is it a Western Union money order? Every company that handles money orders includes very specific rules about them. -- kainaw™ 13:07, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it is a great policy of the ref desk to answer questions on how to most efficiently be a jerk. Googlemeister (talk) 13:24, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

It is obvious that this question is really about how to get a money order, get a refund, and then cash the money order. -- kainaw™ 13:27, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

You can rest assure that no company will ever let you get away with something which literally duplicates your money. Wikiweek (talk) 14:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

No, not really trying to beat the system. Us sisters just do not get along and I really want my sister to be out the money, not the store. I was thinking that perhaps there may be a time delay BEFORE she could get a refund, just to make sure the money order was not cashed. It must take some time for the money order to work its way back to the grocery store that issued it in the first place. I'm not trying to beat the store, just my sister.--Christie the puppy lover (talk) 14:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Western Union offer refunds, all subject to a processing fee and approval, even if the order and receipt are both lost; it will take up to 30 days to get the refund with the receipt or 8 weeks without, and you have to send away to Western Union offices, you can't get it at the place of purchase. If the order has already been cashed, the purchaser will receive a copy of the cashed money order instead.[2] I recommend cashing the money order and then burning the money. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:44, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Uh? If you have cashed that money order your sister would be out of the money for sure. And if you don't get well along, why did she send you money? Anyway, this all seems like women's logic to me...Wikiweek (talk) 16:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

If you wanted to make more of a statement, you should have identified a charity that she hates, like the charitable department of the Roman Catholic Church or the Reformed Church of Satan or the Church of Bob or somewhere in between, and signed the check over to them by writing in the endorsement area "Pay to the order of Reformed Church of Satan" and signing it, and asking them to send her a nice thank you note for her donation. 98.99.202.6 (talk) 17:27, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikiweek: it's not women's logic. I think I understand it, even though I'm a man. You just need sufficiently annoying family to understand it. If OP accepts the order from her sister, then sister can later try to call in some favors (possibly non-monetary), saying “I helped you when you were in need, just remember that grocery money order, you are so cruel to abandon me now when I'm in need”. If OP thinks this is the case, then it makes sense if OP refuses the money order or pretend to not have received it, preferably in such a way that this can even be proved. If the sister is also out of the money, that could be a bonus. – b_jonas 19:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I can understand rejecting the money order, but pretending to not have received it and the desire to ensure the sister doesn't get a refund, that to me suggests more then 'annoying family' but a rather severe breakdown in the relationship whatever the cause/s. I agree it isn't just a female thing although the pretending to not have received it may be partially an attempt to avoid confrontation which is probably more common among females. Nil Einne (talk) 05:52, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

There may be a time delay, but I don't see how that that stops her getting a refund, it just means it will take a while. However in the modern computerised and networked world, there's a fair chance the money orders are all electronic anyway. Some stores may have time limit, in that she'll only be able to get a refund for a few weeks or months but I wouldn't count on these even if you find their official policy. Particularly again in the modern computerised and networked world, it's fairly likely the store will know for a long time whether the money order was ever cashed. In that case, they may be willing to bend their official policy particularly if your sister gives her own story about how she was just trying to do a good thing and you tried your best to punish her. (I know a store here in NZ where their store vouchers are marked as expiring in a year but when I enquired about some nearing expiry they said it didn't really matter and when I did try to use them after they had expired the person was at first unsure but when I showed them the email they processed them without problem.) As with 98.99, I suggest your best bet is to give the money away and tell her you've done so. If you really want to be cruel give it to a charity or someone you know she doesn't like/wouldn't support. If it's possible to give the money order away itself (while it still being able to be cashed) then I guess all the better. Note that if you are able to stop your sister getting a refund without cashing the money order, it just means you've given the store or whoever manages the money orders the $500 anyway (although what they do with unclaimed moneys may vary). BTW just to repeat what others have said above, if she gets a refund no one is going to be out of money (not counting the processing etc), if you attempt to cash it you almost definitely won't succeed. The store isn't out of money due to the original refund because the $500 was never theirs. Nil Einne (talk) 05:36, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Are you 12 years old? This is quite a despicable thing to do. Rather then spending your time trying to ensure your sister loses $500 and plotting various other forms of revenge, why not spend time trying to repair your relationship? Astronaut (talk) 12:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Yep. And if you can't get along, you should at least be neutral. No need to actually HARM someone for no reason. --Goodbye Galaxy (talk) 16:49, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Who was the first to stand at the South Pole?

In a couple of months it’ll be the centenary of the Amundsen’s expedition’s reaching of the South Pole for the first time. This was a triumph of organisation and personal endurance and quite rightly occupies the ‘first to reach the South pole’ entry in history books.

The South Pole marker at Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station

If you’re lucky enough to visit Scott/Amundsen base today one of the first thing’s that you’ll do is visit the official South Pole marker, a silver globe, which is the carefully surveyed point at which the lines of longitude converge (it gets shifted slightly once a year to allow for the movement of the glacier upon which A-S base sits). You can get your photo taken next to it and, I imagine, you might not feel as though you’ve ‘been to the pole’ until you’ve been there.

So who was it that first actually stood upon that spot, the mathematical South Pole?

Reading around what I have been able to discover is this:

Amundsen and his team reached the approximate location of the pole on December the 14th 1911 and set up a tent base, which they named Polheim. They had little time and inadequate equipment (the theodolite had been broken during the journey) to identify where the pole actually was. Given this they decided to 'box' the pole, marking a 10 mile square around where they believed the pole was and skiing grid lines across it. After this they spent a few days taking careful readings, moving forward to their newly calculated pole position and skiing more grids.

Hjalmar Johansen, in Arctic clothing during Nansen's Fram Expedition 1893–96

It was later calculated that Polheim was, at the time, about 5.5 miles from the mathematical pole and that one of Amundsen's team members, Helmer Hanssen, was the one who skied closest, getting to a couple of hundred metres. Amundsen himself may never have got closer than a kilometer.

Scott and his team got as far as the Polheim tent and, as they now realised that they had been beaten and were in poor shape, turned round and started for home.

Nobody returned to the pole for about 45 years until Admiral Byrd led an airborne expedition in 1955. His flight landed in the general vicinity of the pole to scout for the setting up of a permanent base the following year - the International Geophysical Year. The IGY base was intended to do some science, but was mostly to beat the Russians.

So who got to plant their footprints on the official, geographical pole first? Well, you could make a case for it being an American, Lt. Dick Bowers (I don't think that he was any relation to Scott's Bowers), who on November the 20th 1956 led the airdropped team that was tasked with identifying 90 degrees South with modern instruments.[3] He may have been the man who erected the first marker, which seems to have been a bamboo cane. Paul Siple, the expedition's chief scientist, apparently took the first silver globe, originally a photographic lens for taking atmospheric pictures.

Are there any other candidates for or opinions about who got there first?

BTW, I’m not trying in any way to belittle Amundsen’s enormous achievements here, which are historically unimpeachable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blakkandekka (talk • contribs) 12:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Get a copy of the current National Geographic, which has a lengthy story about Amundsen. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Speculation is not Wikipedia's role. HiLo48 (talk) 13:23, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Apologies if this appears as speculation (which certainly has no place in the main Wikipedia), it wasn't intended as such. Perhaps a shorter way of asking the question might be "Who was the first to survey and mark the location of 90 degrees south to within a metre?".Blakk and ekka 13:29, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Did you look for that National Geographic yet? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:28, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean this from the September issue? Good article but, alas, no help with this particular question. Blakk and ekka 15:05, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

That's just the first part of the article. I'll see if I can find my hard-copy and get back later. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:27, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

That may help, but I still say we have to speculate. No matter where people first plonked their tent, or shed, or whatever, and where they "officially" were, folks will at times headed off from that base into the blizzard temporarily for a toilet stop, or for some other informal reason. Even if you can identify who was the first officially there, maybe someone else had a wee there first. HiLo48 (talk) 23:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

OK, I found the magazine. NG treats Amundsen and his team's reaching the pole as a given fact. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Since there is no single point clearly defined as "The Pole", but rather an area in which the "theoretically correct" location is approximately calculated to be, and where the marker has now been placed, most people would agree with National Geographic. I don't think the "within a metre" is a realistic definition because it depends on the model of the geoid and reference ellipsoid currently in use. In future, someone might ask for centimetre accuracy, and that really would be ridiculous. Dbfirs 09:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Works on the attitude of Islam towards modernization

Could you please recommend me some up to date books or articles on the attitude of Islam towards modernization. I should appreciate scientific works in English, French, German or Russian on how Islam as a religion regards scientific, technical and social progress and on how Islamic mentality incorporates new ideas. I should also be thankful for works on the so called Euroislam or European Islam. So far works by Mohammed Arkoun and John Esposito have been most useful for me.95.105.75.136 (talk) 15:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

This article has some good statistics. Women in Islam#Further reading has a lot of books. 69.171.160.77 (talk) 18:22, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Jim Al-Khalili has presented a series for the BBC on Science and Islam. He has a website and a blog, and I'm sure if you approach him he will assist. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Try some of the people and organisations listed at Liberal and moderate movements within Islam. BrainyBabe (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Your question is so broad and general that it's hard to answer with any specificity. One innovation which was conspicuously slow to gain acceptance in a number of Muslim regions was moveable-type printing -- the Ottoman Empire banned printing in its territory of works in Arabic script, or intended for an audience of Muslims, until the early 18th-century, and traditionally-minded Islamic legal-religious scholars in Egypt etc. often didn't fully accept the use of printing for Islamic religious purposes until the late 19th-century. Islamic quasi-movements with a "modernist"-friendly orientation include Islam Hadhari and Islamization of knowledge. You should be aware that the "Liberal and moderate movements within Islam" have had rather little influence overall within the Arab world (though sometimes influential elsewhere). AnonMoos (talk) 22:22, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I recommend What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East by Bernard Lewis as one possible work on the topic. — Lomn 22:40, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Black horseshoe ring

Does Black horseshoe ring really works? I have studied a bit in internet about it. Some people claimed that it works. If it was useless then it wouldn't have been used by people. Has anyone in WP used it and benefited from it?--180.234.122.137 (talk) 16:55, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Luck charms do not work. Any implication that they work in any way is based on a combination of increased confidence and bias sampling. -- kainaw™ 16:57, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

• So I assume that you don't have any belief on it.--180.234.122.137 (talk) 17:20, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Belief does not enter into it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. We are scientific here on the Reference Desk (yes, even here on the Humanities desk). If a double-blind scientific test were to show repeatedly that a certain type of luck charm worked, then we would change our minds. 98.99.202.6 (talk) 17:22, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm curious. How do you do a double-blind test for luck charms that controls for the placebo effect? Surely you need a "luck charm" that your placebo group thinks works and you know doesn't, and moreover is indistinguishable from a real one... 95.150.19.195 (talk) 00:12, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

If I may, what is the OP talking about? Black horseshoe rings are either unknown to me or the phrase is poor grammar that I don't fully understand. Dismas|^(talk) 19:57, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

It's a ring, like you wear on your finger, with a horseshoe emblem. Google it. OR, look in the archives for the very same question, a couple of weeks ago. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:25, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

A couple of weeks ago it was not about black horseshoe rings. Quest09 (talk) 11:25, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

As for "If it was useless then it wouldn't have been used by people", that's flatly untrue, as was demonstrated by centuries of bloodletting, which was not only useful but actually damaging. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Or for that matter, the fad known as the Pet Rock. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:36, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Further to the points, there could well be an effect (as stated) that it does help your life through confidence, etc. We treat plenty of mental health problems, such as depression, whose mental effect is the important part. Solving that could make all the difference. (I agree with the scepticism of actual effects.) Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:02, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Then the right place to send the OP is to placebo effect, which was mentioned earlier but without a link. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:59, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Why is America claimed by some (maybe many) Americans and even still by some non-Americans, based from my personal experience overseas, to be the greatest country on earth?

There was a time when some people in the U.S and in the world marveled at some of America’s accomplishments, achievements, and progress. The U.S was number 1 in breaking almost every record of accomplishments, achievements, and progress. The U.S was seen by some countries around the world, especially by its enemies, as a competition in these areas plus in many other things. However, it seems that near the start of the 21st century, the U.S started to lag behind in the competition.

China & Japan now have the longest bridges in the world. The Lake Pontchartrain Causeway used to hold that title until recently. China also has the world’s highest bridge, the Beipanjiang River 2003 Bridge, surpassing the Royal Gorge Bridge in Colorado. The Burj Khalifa in Dubai is now the world’s tallest skyscraper. The Willis Tower & the Empire State Building were once the world’s tallest skyscrapers. The city with the most skyscrapers, & as a result, the most extensive skyline on earth is now Hong Kong. NYC used to hold that record. London has now become a major business & financial center that now ranks above NYC. Today, none of the top 10 of the world’s most livable cities are in the U.S, my country. China manufactures much of the world’s products now. Almost everything I see literally, even American flags, is now “Made in China,” not “Made in the U.S.A.” Politicians in the U.S have been arguing that stuff should be made again in the U.S. America's credit rating has recently been downgraded from AAA to AA+. Mexico’s unemployment rate now stands at around 5% in contrast to America’s unemployment rate of 9.1% that we in the U.S hear a lot on the news. Some people in the U.S have been asking: What happened to the American dream? France now beats the U.S as the world’s most visited country by international tourists. Paris & London now beat NYC as the most visited cities on earth. A bunch of countries mow beat America’s education system now.

To some non-Americans, especially in 3rd world countries, the meaning of America being the greatest, or should I say the best, country on earth may take on a different meaning as in “roads made of gold” kind of thing. They expect the U.S to have the biggest, the longest, the best, the coolest, and the most amazing things. I’m saying all this based on some testimonies I’ve heard, on some things I’ve seen on TV, & on my travels to the Dominican Republic every summer to visit family members & friends. Now, I still believe that the U.S, my country, is the greatest country on earth, but I find that the title is becoming harder & harder to defend, so why is America claimed by some (maybe many) Americans & even still by some non-Americans, based from my personal experience overseas, to be the greatest country on earth if the U.S is now lagging behind in the world on many things? Willminator (talk) 17:46, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm no great America lover, I'd much rather live right here in the UK. However, what you've done is take each US claim and find some other country that beats it; instead, you need to find one particular country to take the US' place as number one. It's a case of whether they are across the board (majoritively) better. Mexico is crime-ridden; the UK lacks the military capability, world standing and population; China has sub-America standard of human welfare, and rights (at least from the US perspective). If you're going to convince someone that their country is not number one, you have to provide a specific alternative. Partly, of course, this is an American attitude thing (certainly I have problems with it) but it's probably justified, for now. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 17:57, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Probably the most relevant article is American exceptionalism. It's a story that is sold to children at a young age, parroted endlessly by politicians of all parties (with any dissent from the narrative being viewed as essentially traitorous), and all suggestions to the contrary (whether fact-based or not) are denounced as anti-American or Communist or Fascist or what have you (further posts in this thread will likely serve as evidence of this). It's a potent meme, we might say, and one which has both fueled a lot of relatively good American things (Next stop: the Moon!) and bad things (Next stop: Iraq!). "Greatest country on Earth" is not a real title; it's just feel-good nonsense, half-warmed over from the Cold War, when it was important to convince the American people to fund a huge amount of things, and to convince other nations that they should be our friends and not the Soviet Union's. It's clear to any honest and clear-eyed observer that the world has been changing a lot since the Cold War, and that in many respects America has lost a lot of positioning — political, economic, moral, what have you — that used to make it seem so exceptional. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:09, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Just as you can list negative anecdotes. There are many positive anecdotes. How about an average kid from a non-notable family in Hawaii becoming President? It doesn't have to be so extreme. I talked to a woman from Nigeria once who told me that she's been poor in Nigeria, she's been poor in France, and she's been poor in America. By far, being poor in America is better than anywhere in the world. All in all, it is the melting pot aspect of American culture. Anyone can come to the United States and be an accepted citizen. There are those who will purposely refuse to be "melted" into the culture and have difficulty with acceptance, but that is by choice, not be design. Consider China and Japan (which you mentioned). If I were to move to China or Japan, I would never be accepted as Chinese or Japanese. My children wouldn't. My children's children wouldn't. Therefore, the American dream doesn't translate to China or Japan. Someone in Nigeria won't see them as great lands of opportunity as they see the United States. -- kainaw™ 18:25, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Well to break down and counter a few of the points you have made, in terms on engineering (longest bridge, tallest building etc), these in and of themselves are something that are interesting, but not especially important in the grand scheme of things in terms of greatness of a country. I would imagine that less then half of Americans could even tell you where the Pontchartrain Causeway is despite it holding the record for more then 30 years, but more could tell you where the much shorter Golden Gate or George Washington Bridge is. London always has been a major business and financial center, and defeated New York by 1 point in 774 so there is only a minor difference. China makes a vast number of products it is true, but only because the relative standard of living between China and the US makes it cheaper to make the products there. If politicians want those things made in the US, all they have to do is raise tariffs on imports (though the change would take a while to sort itself out). Additionally, you cite that the US has a credit rating of only AA+, but China has a lower credit rating of AA-. Mexico might have an unemployment rate around 5%, the the standard of living for the majority of the employed in Mexico is apparently low enough that Mexican citizens are abandoning their jobs to come work in the US, so it seems very difficult for me to consider your argument as valid. It seems you are using arbitrary measurements to find individual nations to beat the US in single areas while not considering the whole. To put it into perspective, that is like trying to say that the San Fransisco Giants are not the 2010 baseball champions because the Texas Rangers had a better season batting average, the Toronto Blue Jays hit more home runs and the New York Yankees made fewer fielding errors. Googlemeister (talk) 19:20, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

(ec) Mexico may have 5% unemployment but that is partly because 10% of Mexicans live in the United States (and the money they send home is the #2 source of foreign currency after oil sales)[4]. And it is possible that illegal drug exports to the U.S. outrank both those official sources. The Burj Khalifa may be the tallest building in the world today but the U.S. pioneered the technology over 100 years ago and stopped building super-tall buildings ourselves forty years ago. The company that designed the Burj is the same Chicago firm that designed the Willis Tower. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 19:33, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

The fact that America has long since stopped having the need to build giant phallic buildings in order to "prove" itself would actually seem to be a point in America's favor, not the other way around... --Jayron32 19:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

And I suppose one could argue that we don't need to. It's no longer necessary to have all your corporate employees be in one massive building due to the ease of use of the Internet and email. Dismas|^(talk) 19:54, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

And it certainly helps in that department to have a lot fewer corporate employees, no? --Mr.98 (talk) 22:41, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Were we supposed to read the first three massive "wall o' texts" before commenting? I would like to point out that last I checked, we still have the best Air Force and Navy. That's really all you need. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 2 Tishrei 5772 23:16, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

And ICBM's are quite phallic.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 10:21, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

See List of top international rankings by country

and Because Every Country Is The Best At Something.

(The heading “America allegedly greatest country” is adequately brief and adequately informative.)

—Wavelength (talk) 19:53, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Erm, excuse me, just popping out while I check whether I remembered to lock my car... --Shirt58 (talk) 03:23, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

The US is better at sports, and growing up, we all learned that sports is more important than everything else in this world much to the chagrin of those of us in chess club. Gx872op (talk) 21:22, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Claims like "greatest country on earth" are pretty ridiculous. It depends on what you consider great. If we are looking at classical ideas about glory and power, the US certainly was (and maybe still is) the greatest power in the late 20th Century. Great powers like this tend to wax and wane in a cyclical manner. Before the US, Britain was the greatest power, before them Spain and so forth. Thomas Cole made his interesting artistic series about this idea nearly 200 years ago, but The Course of Empire is still pretty applicable. I'd imagine that in sometime (I wouldn't want to make any estimates) the US will no longer be refereed to as the greatest country in the world outside of patriotic myopia. Someone once said told me that except for the past 500 years, the history of the world is the history of China and we'll be seeing a return to norm soon. Not sure if I agree, but interesting to think about. --Daniel 21:46, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Collective narcissism I deem. You can be sure that any country that had a genuine claim to be 'best' wouldn't advertise it, because they'd be quietly assured of themselves and would know they'd only come off as arrogant and preposterous. Vranak (talk) 23:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

The Soviet Union is better. →Σ ⚑  ☭  00:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Why? Because it doesn't exist anymore? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:35, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Tovarich Bugs of Baseball: In US of A, individual plutocrat of baseball steals base. In Soviet Union, ineluctable historical dialectic redistributes all four of capitalist diamond to workers and peasants - in words of Lenin, all your base are are belong to us.--Shirt58 (talk) 11:14, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

When some people who have been born and raised in poor, 3rd world countries like Haiti think about the greatness of America in the world, they think about not only of a land of opportunities and freedoms, but of America having the biggest, coolest, most impressive, best, etc. stuff in the whole world. When some find out the contrary, or what seems to be contrary, for some of those things, they get surprised and wonder if America is really that great. It seems that for some in undeveloped countries, those little things I mentioned in the mother thread plus more do matter to them. I may be wrong, but that has been my experience travelling overseas like to the Dominican Republic, and hearing testimonies of people who have been in poor or developing countries. Why do some people in some countries have that mentality and assumption included when they hear Americans and others saying that America is the greatest country on earth (which as an American I still do believe personally)? Edit: Thanks for all the answers you've all provided to me. They are very helpful. Willminator (talk) 02:51, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, probably because they don't know much about America bro. 71.98.175.19 (talk) 23:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Immigrants who don't like it here are free to leave at any time. There's no anchor holding them back. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:54, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Hauntings in Ireland

What are the most haunted buildings or areas in Ireland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.45.171.4 (talk) 18:48, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

None. There are no such things as ghosts. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:23, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

But I believe in supernatural stuff and the question I ask does have historical and religious significance. --86.45.159.165 (talk) 20:33, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

See Category:Reportedly haunted locations in Ireland. And Wikipedia:WHAAOE, of course. 81.98.38.48 (talk) 20:49, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Karl Rove and his involvement in the group "Concerned Citizens of America"

What is Karl Rove's involvement in the political action group "Concerned Citizens of America." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inthelightphotos (talk • contribs) 23:20, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I seem to remember hearing that name as a Super PAC but I don't remember the details. 75.71.64.74 (talk) 20:08, 1 October 2011 (UTC)