Humanities desk
< March 20	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	Current desk >

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.

March 21

I am looking for a movie to work on Wikipedia

Moved to Entertainment desk.

A. C. Cuza

Hello!

Mi query is about Alexandru Constatin Cuza (1857-1947). Wich was his mother´s name? "Smaranda"?

Thanks. 88.20.40.202 (talk) 19:17, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to [1] p 320 it seems the mother's maiden name would have been Smaranda Coroi. --Soman (talk) 07:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Wales the poorest of 12 regions of the UK?

Reference: Economy of the European Union. And why is Luxembourg, Belgium the poorest of the 12 11 level-2 regions of Belgium? (€21,000/head vs Luxembourg, Luxembourg's €73,000) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See South Wales Valleys#Decline. I think you'll find most of the poorest parts of the UK were previously dependent on heavy industry, which in many cases has now gone elsewhere. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:40, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of like the US' Rust Belt, named after literally rusted abandoned factories. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 08:54, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in both cases, there may be a certain degree of economic isolation, due to social differences. In Wales, those who only spoke Welsh were likely discriminated against economically. While that wouldn't be much of a factor any more, redistributing wealth back to a poor area is by no means automatic. It may happen, with time, but by no means must. StuRat (talk) 20:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're going back a bit there StuRat, industrial cities like Swansea and Cardiff have been English-speaking since the late Middle Ages and English would have been understood by everybody who benefited from compulsory education starting in 1870. The wealth of South Wales was based on coal and steel and in both cases, since the 1980s it's been cheaper to import than to make or dig-up the stuff. In North Wales, slate mining was big business until people started using concrete roof tiles. A similar fate has befallen the mining areas of Kentucky - see America's poorest white town: abandoned by coal. The problem is compounded by geography; if you want to get from North Wales to South Wales, because of the terrain it's quicker to drive back into England and then re-enter Wales, rather than negotiate a route through the hills. This makes relocating businesses to parts of Wales a hard sell. Alansplodge (talk) 21:27, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the US, many blacks have been poor since earlier than 1870, from the slavery period, in fact. StuRat (talk) 21:53, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would not compare an explanation of poverty based on being a member of the "wrong" race, and, explaining regional poverty after the decay in many heavy-industry cities across Europe. The causes are completely different. Scicurious (talk) 23:04, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My comment was just to show that economic disadvantages can stay with a group for a very long time. "Race" is irrelevant to the case in Wales. StuRat (talk) 01:05, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The first industrial wealth of South Wales was largely based on coal and iron, rather than steel. With the late Victorian shift from iron to steel Wales lagged behind in converting and the first generation of Welsh ironworks (up in the Valleys, near the coal) suffered a serious recession, even back then. The later steel plants were mostly built at new sites, on the coastal plain. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:34, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking Welsh or not is entirely irrelevant to the question. It is indeed pretty much completely due to the decline of mining and heavy industry, combined with poor policies by successive governments, leaving entire towns (I'm thinking Merthyr here) without much of a reason to exist. By and large, the South Wales coast (where I live) isn't doing too badly, because of the M4 motorway and the South Wales Main Line, providing quick links to London and surroundings. Fgf10 (talk) 08:24, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I was wondering why it isn't Scotland (cause of the Englishman, Irishman and Scotsman jokes) or maybe the coal and iron regions around Manchester. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 08:54, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is certainly deprivation up there as well, but those areas were a) generally more diversified than South Wales was, and b) made a more successful transition to alternate industries and employments. Fgf10 (talk) 08:58, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They all migrated to the Antipodes, which they renamed New South Wales. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 09:24, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Scotland has oil, unlike Wales. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:08, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If the former industrial regions are now very poor, is it likely that it may get to the point where the local people are so poor, that it will become economical again to employ them for heavy industry, rather than importing? Or is "poor" still much richer than the countries that produce the imported coal? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:22, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The latter. Fgf10 (talk) 10:51, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The M4 motorway runs from London to Cardiff, and the Minister's desk in the Welsh Office. For a long time, before devolution, there was quite a bit of grant money around to improve infrastructure and to provide investment, but it was never spent anywhere outside this corridor, where the Minister could see it. Even along the M4, the money never made it past Swansea. There's one famous factory outside Newport that has gone through a dozen occupants by now, each one the next great hope, but none of them lasting.

Before Hinterland, just no-one knew what happened in the middle bit. Could have been dragons for all we knew. Still might be. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:34, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A mix of problems. Firstly and above all, the destruction of heavy industry and quarrying in the south, coal and steel gone and also slate and aluminium in the north. Wales' only real major cities are in the south, and the main ones, Cardiff, Newport and Swansea, are pretty ugly following first bombing and then terrible, car-centric redevelopment plans in the 1950s onwards that ripped the heart out of their centres. They don't seem to have developed the kind of culture and vibrancy found in Bristol, not far away, or Exeter or Bath. In theory, this should eventually self-correct with businesses moving there to take advantage of cheap property costs and lower cost of workers, but it hasn't really happened: perhaps partly due to timidness induced by the recession, over the last decade my feeling is that businesses have tended just to wince and pay out for London or south-east of England workers rather than try to set up offices in Wales.
Outside the centres, it's the same story as many other parts of the world. Any areas not hit by industrial decline tend to be rural and farmland - never too rich anyway, they have been hit hard by mechanisation and cheap gang labour from eastern Europe. The south-west and west coast is staggering beautiful, some lovely towns, beaches and boat trips out to watch dolphins and seals frolic, but (some oil inport terminals aside) it largely depends on tourist labour and it's seasonal. And Wales' notoriously 'changeable' weather means that a lot of people deserted it for Spain and France and Portugal when flights got cheaper from the 80s onwards.
Finally, the geography of Wales splits it up so that it feels less its own country (as Scotland definitely does) than as several separate extensions of England. Essentially, transport north-south up Wales is not great- look on a map and you'll see that unless you fancy a cross-country drive it's actually often easier to drive into England, up through near Birmingham and then west into Wales again. Both the north and south coasts function as corridors, more closely connected for business and culture to nearby English cities (Bristol and Liverpool) than each other.
None of this makes it not a really great place to go on holiday if you go to the good bits - Pembrokeshire in the south-west, Caernarfon in the north, the countryside up Cardigan Bay. And intelligent marketing may save it - niche tourism has worked very well for Hay-on-Wye and with a basic asset of dirt cheap cost of living if it can get businesses to relocate the south could be onto a winner now many London 'starter' flats are hitting £400k plus. But you want to bring a raincoat. Blythwood (talk) 00:59, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Much of what Blythwood says is accurate, but I strongly dissent from his comments about Cardiff. I can't really speak about Swansea, and it's hard to argue against his comments about Newport, but to my knowledge Cardiff, as the national capital, is certainly not "pretty ugly" or lacking in culture and vibrancy. Could that be the traditional Cardiff-Bristol rivalry speaking? Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:34, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I can only surmise they haven't been in Cardiff for at least 20 years, as their characterisation is very outdated. Significant parts of Cardiff city centre have been redeveloped and are pedestrianised. Saying it's less cultured than Exeter (off all places) is rather ludicrous. Fgf10 (talk) 08:50, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quite. I lived in Exeter for fifteen years, but eventually woke up. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:31, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And its not all doom-and-gloom; see Welcome to Silicwm Valley. Alansplodge (talk) 08:41, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree that Cardiff can hold its own against Bristol as a place, and might develop the culture that the over-priced Bristol is now losing, but Swansea and Newport still couldn't hold a candle to Exeter. Most likely though, if Newport develops it will be as a dormitory for Bristol.

It's also worth looking at the modest improvement of Pontypool and the real success in (of all unlikely places!) Cwmbran. Investment on a decent road in the early '90s has transformed that valley - just compare it to Newbridge and Cwm, next valley over. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:34, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As for Luxembourg, Belgium - the French speaking parts of Belgium (Wallonia) were also traditionally industrial, and have suffered while the more business/trade oriented Flanders and Brussels have boomed. It also seems like Luxembourg the country (a notorious tax haven full of corporate headquarters, hence its very high per capita wealth) outsources a lot of its lower-paid citizens and industrial jobs there, which possibly artificially distorts the figures. The headquarters of Ferrero (where the high paid managers are) is in Luxembourg City, but the Ferrero Rocher factory (where the lower paid line workers are) is in Belgian Luxembourg. Smurrayinchester 09:19, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Someone should point out that Welsh-speakers are given priority in civil service jobs. DOR (HK) (talk) 10:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the OP is seeking a one-word answer?

Thatcher. NPOV on hold.

That's okay, the long answers were insightful and interesting. As is the word. Nice to learn that conservatives can ruin things across the pond too. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Law enforcement officers entering a home

Would they do that with their hand stretched, like in the movies, or would they keep the gun near their chest? It seems to me that the second method would protect the policeman better against a side-attack or in a close-quarters fight, and still allow him to shoot if attacked. --Scicurious (talk) 23:00, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is this what you mean by "like the movies"? If so, that's how SWAT rolls, when they're needed. But the typical police entrance is far more boring. They keep their guns in their holsters and mostly talk. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:17, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to recall an article in Guns & Ammo about eight or ten years ago that talked about how the standard firearms training paradigm is a two-handed grip for accuracy (said article disputed that a two-handed grip was necessarily more accurate than a one-handed grip). Looking at it from an ergonomics and straightforward anatomy perspective, shooting from the hip as you describe probably makes problems for follow-up shots; with your full arm involved you can brake any recoil/climb using all the muscles of your arm, rather than just the wrist. If you're talking about holding the gun at the center of your chest, there's probably a greater risk of the slide becoming snagged on your clothing, where the brass gets ejected (I once shot a Beretta that would periodically eject straight up, striking me in the safety glasses), and there's still the problem of what to do if you need to aim down the sights. I believe that the general answer is it's easier, at least for how officers are trained, to fire handguns two-handed, near eye level. It's where they're used to holding the gun, and relearning something like how to shoot accurately is difficult and potentially dangerous if you need to clear a room rapidly. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 03:58, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You simply can't hold the gun near the chest, that makes no sense. You don't know where you're aiming, and the recoil would make you hit yourself, and then the gun ends up pointing upwards. --OpenFuture (talk) 09:40, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This page is likely to help the OP research the answer to their question. --Jayron 32 13:07, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recently a police officer entered my house, and his hand was stretched out, to shake mine. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 21:20, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]