Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2007 July 15

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.

July 15

Zinoviev and Kamenev?

I read an account of the Russian secret police which made a mention of a trophy called Zinoviev and Kamenev held by the head of the NKVD (Yezhov, I think). Now, I know who these people were, but what was this trophy? Thanks Sir Topazx 02:31, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

After their executions in 1936, the bullets were removed from their skulls by order of Genrikh Yagoda, head of the NKVD, duly labelled Zinoviev and Kamenev, and kept as a gruesome trophy. After the fall of Yagoda they passed into the possession of Nikolai Yezhov, his successor. I have no information on their subsequent history. Both Yagoda and Yezhov, incidentally, also had a large collection of pornography, as well as lots of female undergarments, frilly panties and the like, which may give some insight into the mind of the secret policeman! But if you are looking for real perversion try Lavrenty Beria Clio the Muse 03:09, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Current rate of extinction

hey all, i wasn't sure where to put this one but since i was helped so well last time i figured i try here as i suppose it relates to ecopolitics and such. i would like a source that states the current world extinction rate. i have heard in a several different places that there are currently 200 species going extinct a day but never (to my knowledge) with a source. --74.97.142.249 04:30, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

This may be better asked at the science reference desk. Wrad 05:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Have you read Holocene extinction event? Skarioffszky 11:12, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

This is something that is very difficult to quantify, seeing as very many of the species that go extinct have never been formally discovered. 82.36.179.20 22:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Woman and sports

Why are there no women in professional American baseball, football, or basketball? Although I realize that the major league teams are privately owned, can’t you sue a private company or corporation based on sex discrimination in most states? Why is there so little fuss about this situation? There seems to be plenty of controversy about women in the military. Thanks! --S.dedalus 04:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

First of all, there are female professional athletes in those sports, such as the players in the WNBA and Women's Professional Football League. There are no women in the major leagues because no woman good enough to make the major leagues has yet been found. Manon Rhéaume reached the top level of minor pro hockey, while Lusia Harris was drafted by the New Orleans Jazz back when the NBA draft had seven rounds. Annika Sörenstam nearly made the cut in a men's PGA event a few years back. -- Mwalcoff 05:22, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Is the question about why women haven't yet reached the men's level of popularity and marketability in team sports? Women's_sports#History has some information and links, but doesn't explain everything. If the question is why women don't compete with and against men in most high-level sports, there are physiological reasons in addition to historical/socio-political ones. See Gender Differences in Endurance Performance and Training. Of course, as pointed out on that site, it only applies at the very top level (see for instance The Battle of the Sexes), and not for every sport. For example, I wonder whether, à la longue, men have a significant physiological edge in golf. ---Sluzzelin talk 08:45, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Michelle Wie frequently competes in male golf tournaments, but so far as I know, has never even made a cut. Corvus cornix 19:18, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the references. Not being much of a sports fan myself, most of this was new to me. I still find it very hard to believe, however, that there are so few women who are significantly skilled in sports to be able to overcome any physiological gender differences that may exist. (Especially considering the success of the United States women's national soccer team) Also, even at high school level many schools do not offer women’s sports equally with men’s sports. I guess my question was mostly, why is there not more protest about the lack a woman in sports? --S.dedalus 20:41, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Title IX is supposed to address equality between genders in high school and college sports, although it doesn't always work in practice. When there have been cases when women have sued because a school isn't equal in its dealings, the schools generally tend to cut men's programs rather than to add women's programs. Corvus cornix 20:48, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe there is not more protest because that protest should be logically made by females and they are not interested in sports at all. On the other hand, whenever I watch a female soccer, basketball or whatever match I see its level is truly abysmal, therefore nobody pays any attention. And I don't think things will change that fast. --Taraborn 21:18, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, a group of us complained about not playing rugby at school past year 8, when the boys did. We didn't really mind playing netball, rounders and hockey instead of football and cricket, but we missed the rugby. We kicked up a fuss, so they introduced a bit more and started a girls rugby club after school. In contrast, my younger brother led a campaign for boys to be allowed to play hockey. The message, I suppose, is that most people didn't really mind about most things, but when we did things changed. Meh. Skittle 21:41, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

In regard to professional sports, it is not a discussion of the athletic skills of the average men and average woman (of which I believe there is no significant difference). It is a discussion of the most athletically fit men in the world compared to the most athletically fit women in the world. As has been demonstrated throughout history, the tiny fraction of a percent of the most athletically fit men outperform the tiny fraction of a percent of the most athletically fit women. Also, it has been demonstrated that the best women are getting better. However, the best men are getting better at the same time. So, while the average man and woman are pretty much matched in athletic ability, the most athletically fit men and women are not - especially in sports designed by and for men. -- Kainaw^(what?) 22:32, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The tier below America professional football is NCAA Division 1 college ball. Katie Hnida in 2003 was the first woman to score points in his level of competition, as a place kicker for the University of Colorado. Some of the barriers to women in traditional men's sports are shown in that article. She said she was sexually harrassed and raped by her teammates. Her coach, Gary Barnett, rather than supporting her, said ""Katie was not only a girl, she was terrible. OK? There's no other way to say it." There are barriers beyond gender-related differences in size and strength. Edison 02:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I forgot to note that in the area of performance enhancers, any female can achieve the same level of physical strength/endurance as any male. But, in professional sports (apparently excluding "professional" wresting), the use of performance enhancers are controlled to some extent. -- Kainaw^(what?) 15:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't underestimate the physical differences between the world's best male athletes and the world's best female athletes. In 1998, Karsten Braasch, ranked only 203rd in the world among men, easily beat both Serena and Venus Williams, two of the world's top female tennis players. The best NCAA women's basketball teams practice against men, but even though the male players are not scholarship athletes, they have to be restricted in how they can play so they don't injure the women. The top female finisher in this year's Boston Marathon ranked only 48th overall (behind 47 men). -- Mwalcoff 22:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Trireme marines

What kind of equipment did marines on board Greek triremes wear? Was it very similar at all to the gear of land hoplites? 69.77.205.206 05:29, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

At the Battle of Salamis the Greek ships carried fully-armed hoplites. Apparently the intention was to board enemy ships and fight hand-to-hand as they would on land. Try reading trireme and related articles, and find the books listed in the references; tactics and equipment would have been different for each battle over the centuries. Adam Bishop 17:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I can really only offer some educated speculation here. On land the hoplite would have fought as spearmen in phalanx formation. Now, although naval contests at this time were essentially land battles fought on water, for practical reasons I cannot imagine the hoplites would have acted in the same fashion as land based formations. For one thing there would be insufficient space to allow phalanx deployment, and the long spears used on land would be particularly unwieldy at sea, with galley grappling galley. It would make more sense for marines to use short throwing javelins, bows and arrows and swords for close quarter combat. Clio the Muse 22:31, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Captain Hook and Wendy's father in Peter Pan

According to the Wikipedia articles on Peter Pan, Captain Hook and Wendy's father are usually played by the same actor in the plays and films. But it doesn't explain why. So, why?

Having never seen the play, I can't be sure. But I would suspect that it's due to the characters never having to be on stage at the same time. And since, I think, the part of Wendy's father is a minor role, it's easy for the actor playing Hook to just memorize a few more lines. And it saves the theater company from having to hire another actor. Dismas|^(talk) 09:41, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Additionally perhaps it is to create a reference to suggest that in Peter Pan's world they see their father as Captain Hook - perhaps it makes a statement about the writer's view of parent/child relationships? I suspect the above answer is more likely but it would see odd to have both characters portrayed as the same person (one in real-world another dream) and not expect references to them being linked. Of course having not read Peter Pan (only seen the film) I have no idea if my reasoning is possible. ny156uk 14:06, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

From Peter Pan: "It is traditional in productions of Peter Pan for Mr. Darling (the children's father) and Captain Hook to be played (or voiced) by the same actor. Although this was originally done simply to make full use of the actor (the characters appear in different sections of the story) with no thematic intent, some critics have perceived a similarity between the two characters as central figures in the lives of the children. It also brings a poignant juxtaposition between Mr. Darling's harmless bluster and Captain Hook's pompous vanity." So I don't think it is meant to hint that Hook was Daddy.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

can you name some brave famous policemen

can you name some famous brave poicemen?

We sure can. See our List of notable police officers. (Quite a few interesting surprises there, such as Nigel Mansell, Ray Reardon, and a handful of serial killers...)--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

That page says absolutely nothing about bravery. This is such a huge subject that it is simply impossible to give a comprehensive answer. For many policemen going on duty is an act of bravery in itself, and those who are recognised for particular merit rarely stay famous for long. But from the United Kingdom you can have, by way of a solitary example, James Wallace Beaton, who was awarded the George Cross in 1974 for protecting Princess Anne from a kidnap attempt. Rather more controversial, and a lot more famous, is Artur Nebe, hanged for his part in the attempt on Hitler's life in 1944. But you can also have Wyatt Earp, undeniably brave, and perhaps the most famous policeman of all! Clio the Muse 23:56, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Here's one from Australia: Eric George Bailey. We don't have an article on him; perhaps we should. Any takers? Antandrus (talk) 00:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Louis XII

How effective was Louis as king of France. What comparisons can be made with Henry VII of England? Pere Duchesne 11:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

As an example of early modern kingship Louis XII bears quite a close relationship to Henry VII. Although he came late-and unexpectedly-to power, he acted with vigour, reforming the French legal system, reducing taxes and improving government, much like Henry in England. He also occupies the same ambigious position in history, being both a late Medieval and a Renaissance monarch. His marriage to Anne of Brittany, conceived for polital purposes, might also be said to parallel that of Henry to Elizabeth of York. Louis was also skilled in managing his nobility, including the powerful Bourbon faction, which greatly contributed to the stability of French government.

Although Louis' administration was not dominated by lawyers and financial specialists to the same degree as that of Henry, he was just as innovative. In the Ordinance of Blois of 1499 and the Ordinance of Lyon of 1510, he extended the powers of royal judges and made efforts to curb corruption in the law. Highly complex French customary law was to be codified and ratified by royal proclamation. Although he was less financially astute than the parsimonious Henry, he was reasonably careful, unlike many of his predecessors, with crown revenues. At the end of his reign the crown deficit was no greater than it had been when he succeeded Charles VIII in 1498, despite several expensive military campaigns in Italy. His fiscal reforms of 1504 and 1508 tightened and improved procedures for the collection of taxes.

The one big difference between the two monarchs was in military affairs. For Henry war was simply 'bad for business.' Louis, in contrast, through his obsession with the duchy of Milan, to which he had a claim in right of his grandfather, embarked on several campaigns in Italy. His greatest success came in his war with Venice, with the victory at the Battle of Agnadello in 1509. Things became much more difficult for him from 1510 onwards, especially after Julius II, the great warrior Pope, took control of the Vatican. Although his Italian ambitions unravelled, Louis managed to end his reign in 1515 as a well respected monarch, who had withstood a great European coalition of powers. He had duly earned the title of 'Father of the People', conferred upon him by the Estates in 1506. Clio the Muse 00:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Clio, I incorporated some of the above into the text of Louis XII of France. --Ghirla^-трёп- 22:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Richard Sharpe

I've just been watching some dvds of the Sharpe TV series and was wondering how accurate the depiction of the Peninsular War is? Essex teen 12:08, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Any particular aspects? Most producers these days strive for authenticity. Have you tried comparing it with our Peninsular War article?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The Sharpe series is as good a depiction of the people and the times as it can be, considering fiction of this kind can only ever be an approximation of an enormously complex series of events. But I would urge you, Essex teen, not to get too hung up on the issue of verisimilitude. There are many good histories on the Peninsular War, and I would he happy to recommend one, if you wish. Sharpe is immensely enjoyable drama, and best to approach it at that level. Besides, Sean Bean was made for the part, and, if I may offer a personal view, the most delicious creature on two legs! He is my ideal 'bit of rough', and I would simply love to be his compañera. Clio the Muse 23:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

How many people believe in a god

Approximately how many people on this planet believe in the supernatural (particularly including deities and an afterlife)? Thanks. Kate Moore 12:37, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Your terms are quite vague, as indeed are most people's beliefs. So do you want people who believe in God, or the supernatural, or deities, and/or an afterlife? The statistics are also very vague. I mean nobody can maintain meaningful stats on this sort of thing. However, our article on religion will give you some suggestions for numbers as will the dedicated website adherents.com.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Does believing in 3 gods counts? Or are you specifically interested in believing in 1 god. 211.28.119.72 14:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The original said "the supernatural (particularly including deities and an afterlife)" so, yes, she was including belief in 3 gods. DuncanHill 15:08, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I strongly want to believe that there are other people, but, since there's no way at all to prove that they exist, it requires as much faith as believing in God. I guess more than 99% of "people" believe in something they can't prove, such as that there are other people. I think that can be called a "religion" in some senses. A.Z. 16:20, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

(http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html) seems to suggest that 84% ( of the world population, if not more (the '16% secular/non-religious etc. may actually believe in some form of after-life/deity etc). That would equate to around... 5.3-billion (based on 6.6billion world population). Whilst any world-population based stats are victims of their sample-size and methodology this doesn't mean they can't give a rough estimate. Hope this helps (just realised the answer above links to the same site...) ny156uk 17:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The site claims that about half of the group marked secular/non-religious believes in a God, but isn't part of any organised religion, so that brings the figure up to about 6 billion. Laïka 21:23, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

So, when someone says they are secular or non-religious, the site says they are lying? DuncanHill 23:18, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

No, by non-religious means they believe in some sort of higher power, but don't belong to any kind of organised church to worship this power. Laïka 23:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Ideally, yes, but that's not how it actually goes. A lot of people claim to be non-religious but still believe in a god or divine force. Or there's that classic excuse, "I don't have a religion, but I am spiritual..." It's hard to have good statistics when most of these polls are flawled due to unspecific, vague options and the fact most people have unspecific, vague beliefs. — Kieff | Talk 23:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Excuse for what? -- JackofOz 04:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Of course, there are also people who have a religion, but do not believe in a god (eg Buddhists). DuncanHill 14:23, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

FWIW, I don't. What is interesting is the percentage of people who do believe in god is decreasing. Perhaps someday none of us will be able to testify in court... XM 23:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Only if we all move to Arkansas and hire good lawyers... Laïka 23:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

And overturn the US constitution.... Skittle 14:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

You do not need to swear to god to testify in (US) court, but you must at least affirm to tell the truth. Additionally, the word or concept of "god" appears nowhere in the Constitution, and the only mention of religion is in the First Amendment. --Edward Morgan Blake 10:04, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

This is only for America, but Newsweek reported God's Numbers in March 2007. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Was Malcolm X Wahabi?

What branch of mainstream Islam did Malcolm X covert to after leaving the Nation of islam? --Gary123 12:58, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Islam isn't like Christianity, in that membership of a sect is not an essential part of membership of the religion, there's no problem at all with someone defining themself simply as Muslim. However, a distinction could be estimated based on the sect of the Mosque at which the Muslim prays, but thats a bit hit and miss. In the case of Malcolm X, he probably didn't consciously think of himself in terms of a member of a sect. 82.36.179.20 23:03, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Orthodox Sunni. Neutrality^talk 16:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

How were the classes of U.S. Senators initially decided?

Classes of United States Senators says:

• around the time of the first federal elections, in 1788, each state appointed its two Senators for, respectively,
  • Class I: a two-year and a six-year term,
  • Class II: a four-year and a six-year term,
  • Class III: a two-year and a four-year term,

At that time, how did they decide which states would get which classes initially? --Lph 14:13, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

A committee assigned the classes so that senators in each class would be geographically dispersed and would not include both senators from one state; then lots were drawn to decide which class would serve which length of term. On the www.senate.gov web site, see /artandhistory/history/minute/Senatorial_Lottery.htm. --Anonymous, July 15, 17:05 (UTC).

Thanks! --Lph 01:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

The British Empire David05121970

Why and when did the british colonate australia —Preceding unsigned comment added by David05121970 (talk • contribs)

History of Australia is a good place to start. DuncanHill 20:56, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

More specifically, David, have a look at the History of Australia (1788-1850), the History of New South Wales, Convictism in Australia and Penal transportation. Before the American War of Independence the North American colonies were the chief destination for those sentenced to transportation. Thereafter the burden fell on Australia. Clio the Muse 23:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Who is the figure on the reverse of the Iraq Campaign Medal—Preceding unsigned comment added by Willy turner (talk • contribs)

Looks like the goddess Liberty to me.DuncanHill 20:51, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

To be precise it is the Statue of Freedom, which is, I suppose, Liberty by any other name, though I suspect the intention was to avoid too direct a reference to the goddess that stands guard over New York! The sunburst represents hope and success, and the scimitars are an allusion to Sadam's monumental swords, but pointing downwards to represent the attainment of freedom. The whole story is here [1] Clio the Muse 22:19, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Two short stories by Ray Bradbury

Hi. I'm trying to remember where I red two short stories... I asked on the "oracle" page of the french Wikipedia but nobody found, so I try that here. I hope it is Ray Bradbury and not another author.

• The first story is about a man who finds a drawing machine. It makes wonderful artwork, but it goes more and more abstract, poorer and poorer. The man eventualy understands that the "draw" button was a "deleting" button.
• The second story is a post-disaster story. A very old survivor tells the others about all the little things of the life of "before", mostly about objects (cigarettes, cans,...)

Well, that's all ! Thanks for any help. Jean-no 23:20, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know the first one, but the second is Bradbury. "To the Chicago Abyss". It's in The Machineries of Joy (1964). First published in the Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, 1963. I remember it well. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 00:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I think you are right ! Jean-no 07:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Reasonable Doubt

Assuming my constitutional arguement fails, and I am allowed to testify, what are some good tactics to avoid a speeding ticket? I have little legal experince, therefore I am unsure as to the legal loopholes I can exploit to get out of a ticket. If the officer says I was speeding and I say I was not, does that leave reasonable doubt? How can I go about getting the records & dates of his training on how to use radar dectors? Can I get a copy of when/how their speed detection equipment was calibradted and the accuracy of it? Do I have the right to have a lawer appointed for to represent me or do I have to argue the case myself? XM 23:34, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure enough people told you in your previous post that Wikipedia does not give legal advice. Adam Bishop 00:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Your actual strategy needs to come from you and a lawyer, but bear in mind some of the things that have been discussed as responses to some of your previous questions. Traffic court is a very fast operation, and the judge is likely to have seen the kinds of arguments you are suggesting many times a day. Similarly, just saying, "well, your honor, I wasn't speeding", isn't going to cut it either (at least, if I were in that position, it wouldn't for me!).

Some of the information you are looking for might be public records in Alabama. You'll need to dig to see if you can figure this out, and bear in mind that that may take serious amounts of time (i.e., you may invest more time than the penalty is worth).

You are allowed to have a lawyer, but unless you are facing risk of incarceration (either by direct sentence in jail or suspended sentence), the State does not (and probably will not) appoint a lawyer if you are indigent (see Alabama v. Shelton (2002)). Based on what you've indicated so far, I doubt that applies, so you could shell out yourself as you wish, or you can proceed on your own. –Pakman044 00:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Ill let you guys know how it goes.

Why this person keeps asking, I understand. Why we're leaving these questions, I do not. Geogre 04:04, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, good luck with your case, XM. Foxhollow 04:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

If you google "how to get out of a speeding ticket" there are lots of guides and suggestions. Some are good and some are bad. Some require you to watch what you say to the officer who cites you. The suggestions there are as good as (and as worthless as) any that people are going to offer here. --24.147.86.187 13:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The best way to get out of a speeding ticket is to learn how to drive without speeding all the time Nil Einne 13:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The second-best is to drive a car that doesn't attract attention. And the third-best is to be the second-fastest driver on the road. --Carnildo 22:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)