Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 May 28

Humanities desk
< May 27	<< Apr | May | Jun >>	May 29 >

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.

May 28

Paul Nicklen Art

My son is doing a project for school and has a print out of Paul Nicklen's "A Brilliant Aurorae over Grey Mountains" painting. He has to have the name of the painting, artist name, and date of the painting. We obviously have the name of the painting and the artist. Can you tell me the date of the painting?

Thank you,

Sherman, TX —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.96.233.174 (talk) 01:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Sherman, why not show your son how to search google for Paul Nicklen. The first hit is the photographer's website. Your son can send him an email to ask when he took the picture (it is a photograph, not a painting, as far as I can tell - is it one of these?). A few hits further down you can show your son Nicklen's official biography from National Geographic, which might help with the project too. WikiJedits (talk) 01:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

dominating force

who was the dominating force in WWII in terms of military might and effectiveness not necessarily in terms of number of men —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.98.97.66 (talk) 04:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The Allies generally, and either the Soviet Union or the United States specifically, depending on your criteria. If you want a different scale, the tank and/or blitzkrieg tactics and the aircraft carrier would be good suggestions, much as trenches and the machine gun defined the Great War battlefield. — Lomn 04:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The Atomic bomb. Edison (talk) 07:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The atomic bomb didn't fight the war; all it did was convince Japan to surrender at a time when they were at their weakest anyway. As has been said, radar won the war, the atomic bomb just ended it. The import of the atomic bomb even as a military weapon during WWII has been greatly exaggerated, to say nothing of the fact that after Hiroshima and Nagasaki the US supplies of them dwindled to almost nothing until the late 1940s. Carpet bombing had far more military consequences than the atomic bomb did. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Not for the most part of the war, though. SGGH ^speak! 09:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The problem with this question is that the Second World War had different stages. There just isn't a single answer for the whole of the War. Xn4 16:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

US Air Force Distinguished Service Medal

I've asked several people this, including Air Force public relations, and gotten no answer. What is the blue stone that is used at the center of the Distinguished Service Medal? Fonce Diablo (talk) 05:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The US Military site here discusses the "obverse design has a sunburst of thirteen gold rays separated by thirteen white enameled stars, with a semiprecious blue stone in the center." while this site says "The blue stone in the center represents the vault of the heavens" but I can't find the specific material. No books seem to name is as anything other than "blue stone" either. SGGH ^speak! 09:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

What if you called air force pr back and asked them who is the manufacturer of the medal? Then call that company - they should know. WikiJedits (talk) 13:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

DHL company in Malaysia

How to explain the general environment of DHL company in Malaysia using the Pestel analysis and it`s competative environment using porter`s five forces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.188.235.131 (talk) 05:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Have you seen our pages PEST analysis and Porter 5 forces analysis? Look at the criteria and then find out how DHL matches those. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 09:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

My religion is between my god and me

I read the quote somewhere, but I can't remember who said it. At first I thought it was from Gandhi, but I can't find any site that attributed the quote to him. Can anyone help me identify who said it? Although now that I think about it, it could have been from an anonymous person. Anyway, your help in clarifying it would be appreciated. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.69.217.138 (talk) 08:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Malcolm X said "Island is my religion, but I believe my religion is my personal business. It governs my personal like and my personal morals. And my religious philosophy is personal between me and the God in whom I believe", that's the closest I can find. SGGH ^speak! 09:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

inherit the throne

Why does gender sometimes matter in inheriting the throne and sometimes it doesn't? Princess Anne goes lower than her younger brothers, but why then does Princess Beatrice go higher than Peter Philips even though he's a male? 67.68.32.13 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 10:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I think if all else is equal then it goes males first then females, but if they are 'steps' ahead then they don't get jumped up the queue. I have no idea if Beatrice is a closer relative than Peter Phillips, but presumably she is and that is why she is ahead. Whereas Anne is no closer than her younger brothers so they will 'overtake' her by virtue of being male. There's probably a wiki article on it under something like succession or British Monarchy 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Line of succession to the British throne is probably the best article. Beatrice outranks Peter because sons outrank daughters, and children come before siblings. Andrew's children come immediately after Andrew, and thus before Anne and her children. Algebraist 11:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

This is Cognatic Primogeniture, because they can't be bothered to change it to a more modern and equal system. Although some countries have. And I think some are even worse, hardly ever letting women rule.HS7 (talk) 15:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Japan for example (Japanese succession controversy), although there have been talk of changing it because of the lack of a suitable male heir. The birth of one seems to have delayed/reduced calls for this but the current PM for example, still supports it. The Windsor case is complicated by the fact that the support of the Commonwealth realms will be ideal to avoid the situation where the various laws are out of sync with each other on succession and the fact that many of those most supportive of the idea probably want to do away with the monarch anyway. The fact that the current line means it's likely to make no difference is another factor. If William gets married and his first born is a daughter with at least one son after that, there may be a stronger impetus (but it'll likely have to happen when the male heirs are still fairly young otherwise there will be complaints it's unfair to those who were raised expecting to be the next in line after their father) Nil Einne (talk) 16:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

It's also complicated by the facts that certain female members of the Royal Family reportedly desperately don't want to be higher up in the succession list, and that even if sex differences were wiped out the three closest heirs would remain the same. Therefore nobody feels an urgent need to change things. (Also, the change must be made by an act of Parliament, and I suspect the government of the day doesn't want the hassle.) --NellieBly (talk) 03:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

To avoid controversy, it may be best to make changes before the younger brother is born. Some people here in Sweden are still bothered about Prince Carl Philip getting bumped from being first in line to the throne at the age of seven or so months, when the reforms of the Act of Succession were adopted to equal primogeniture. /85.194.44.18 (talk) 16:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

It's an odd hangover, particularly these days when discrimination by gender is generally outlawed in most other areas of life. They also discriminate on religious grounds - the monarch can technically be a member of any religion except Roman Catholicism. I believe Tony Blair talked about changing the law to make the succession arrangements more in line with modern thinking on inclusivity in employment, but it hasn't got past that stage. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, according to the Windsors' website, the religious requirements are more restrictive (must be a protestant and in communion with the CofE). Any such change would (I think) be hotly contested, and like Nil, I doubt any government will try to push it through until it actually matters. Algebraist 22:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how ordering by age is any fairer than ordering by sex and then age. It's not as though any of these people did anything to earn their place in the line of succession. The only benefit to changing the order that I can see would be a larger proportion of queens, which certainly wouldn't be a bad thing. I prefer queens anyway, kings are a lot less mobile and have to be carefully protected. But ultimately it seems like it would be much "fairer" to do away with the royal family and promote pawns instead—by general election presumably, or we could bring back the old system of quests perilous. Or get rid of the monarch entirely, but I'm not sure that's a good idea. There are advantages to having separate ceremonial and political heads of state. -- BenRG (talk) 23:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

@ Algebraist: Putting aside the facts that Charles was the first-born anyway, and that his first-born child is also a male, one could argue that it matters a great deal already. It matters because the succession rules incorporate examples of structural discrimination that are out of step with the way the rest of the Commonwealth is expected to operate. A lot of people still look to the Royal Family as role models. The Queen and her various governors-general have given royal assent to all the various bits of anti-discrimination legislation throughout the Commonwealth, and I'm sure all the assenters would have agreed these are good laws that make for a better and fairer world. The Queen has done a lot of things to modernise the monarchy and ensure she's seen as being in touch with community expectations, e.g. paying taxes she's not legally required to pay etc. Many people want to see the outright removal of the monarchy, but even they would welcome a change to the succession laws to bring them more into line with the access and equity framework that we mere mortals live by. Granted, any such change would not have any actual effect until such time as the death of a monarch whose first-born child happens to be a female. The earliest possible occasion would be the death of William V (currently Prince William), assuming he has a daughter first. That's probably at least 60 years down the track, and who knows if there'll even be monarchies by then (Nepal has just abolished its monarchy). I'm more interested in the implicit unfairness in the British model that has always applied and continues to this day. Symbolic changes are just as important as practicable changes, and constitutional monarchies are all about symbolism. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I find it highly unlikely a change like this will occur if the order has already been established for a long time and the current Prince is expecting and in training to be King. Unless of course the current prince desperately doesn't want to be King and the Princess who was first born desperately wants to be Queen. Hence unless this change happens with a few years of the birth of the Prince after the Princess, it simply ain't going to happen. Also, I suspect any change like this will most likely happen under the Conservative party in the UK since it simply isn't worth the hassle for Labour or the LibDems who on the whole have a fair number of people and supporters who want to just do away with the monarchy so fixing something which (in their view) is fundamentally broken in a way which doesn't make any real difference to them is likely to be seen as somewhat pointless. Nil Einne (talk) 10:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Romani/Gipsy brass band music

Hello. I've searched the articles on Romani music, but haven't been able to find what I am looking for. Quite specifically, I am looking for a piece of brass band music. It's very enthralling and cheery, but I don't know what is being sung. I recently saw a surrealistic Yugoslavian film (though recently made) about two Yugoslavs who fought the German occupation. Not sure about the title. Anyway, the brass band was prominent, because it'd follow them and perform this same piece over and over again. Performed instrumentally (as it was in that film), it had good potential for repeating over again. Trumpets and bass drums were important, but there were many other brass instruments. It would go something like DAdahdah(dadada), DAdahdah(dadada), DAdahdah(dadada), DAdahdah(dadada)-aaa-*wild and chaotic, writing doesn't really suffice*.

I know you've been able to answer vaguer questions about pieces of art, literature and music before, so I hope this will suffice. :) Scaller (talk) 13:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The movie is Underground (film), the soundtrack is "Kalasjnikov". Thank you! Scaller (talk) 13:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Are there social movements using wikis? And how?

I am trying to find information on whether there are any social movements using the wiki technology, and if so, how are they using it. If you can provide any examples (of social movement wikis, or works discussing that, or just anything you've heard) I would appreciate it.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 13:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Anytime a widespread group of people want to share information and collaborate, a wiki is a free and easy way to do so. They're easy enough to find. Google an issue and the word wiki. After you get past the wikipedia stuff, most major issues have at least one. ex: Autism Wiki or Global Warming Wiki. 160.10.98.34 (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Depends on what you mean by "social movement"? I'd say Wikipedia qualifies. --D. Monack | talk 19:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

What is the name for the study of the history of printing / writing / the book?

I may want to study the above in graduate school. Assuming that I could get in to most programs, what would the best choice be?

In other words, would it be better to study history, English, or even anthropology? Where are the best programs located? Who are the leading scholars in this field?

Your help in answering my questions is greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.87.70.194 (talk) 14:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

This is a very general question. You haven't mentioned for example, whether you're likely to be restriced to one country. It sounds to me that you're an American, but whatever the case, are you willing to consider universities in the US? Canada? the UK? Australia? What about e.g. Germany or France or Japan (which will almost definitely entail learning French or German if you don't know it already). Nil Einne (talk) 15:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Printing, of course, has a history which is very different from that of writing, and the history of writing divides into the history of the act of writing itself (palaeography, etc) and that of writing as a literary art. Books are part of the history of all of them. So your question really needs more focus, as suggested by Nil Einne. Xn4 16:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the above really falls into anthropology; I've seen people studying such things in both English programs as well as History programs, as well as History of Science programs (in the latter venue, look at the works by Jim Secord or Adrian Johns). There are a lot of links at the bottom of the History of the book page that might be useful. From what I understand of it, the specific venue you will want will depend on what time period and location you are interested in (19th century Britain? 15th century France? etc.) or whether you have thematic interests (the book as a way of transmitting scientific knowledge? the book as reflective of changing literary patterns of the middle class?), etc. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

To clarify: yes, I am an American. I have studied English at both a small liberal arts school in the U.S. as well as an Oxbridge college in the U.K. and would prefer to continue studying in a country where English is the native language. I am interested in the medium of the book itself, its history, and its place in anthropological and cultural studies. I suppose I was wondering if English is the best path to studying the medium of the book (in graduate school). Thank you for your responses thus far. 204.87.70.194 (talk) 18:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

You'll probably want to read up on some of the basic seminal texts in the field, just so you have a better idea of what it is you want to do and how it compares with what has already been done. After having done that it will be much easier to talk with potential professors about their programs, whether they would be apt for you. (And while I have no doubt that there would be anthropological insights to be gained, again, I have never seen anything that would make me think that this sort of study would be considered appropriate in an Anthropology department. They would wonder what you were doing had to do with their discipline. Just a tip. You might look into Science and Technology Studies, a discipline which includes anthropology and history and would probably be more accepting to that approach, if you really want to go the Anthropology route. In general though I think you're looking at English programs or History programs.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 19:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

To answer a part of the question, I don't know of a word for the study of the history etc. of books. There are plenty of nifty words in that general area, though. "Bibliogony" is the production of books. "Bibliology" is the scientific description of books. "Bibliopegy" is bookbinding. "Bibliopoesy" is the making of books. --Milkbreath (talk) 19:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

There is a program at the University of Toronto (in collaboration with various departments) called "Book History and Print Culture", which covers all of this. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

In academia in general it is called history of the book. If you told people you were interested in studying that they'd understand what you meant. If you said you were interested in bibilology they'd say Gesundheit. ;-) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

What is the Marxist Scientific Method?

Is there any work that outlines the Marxist scientific method? --Gary123 (talk) 15:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean by the Marxist scientific method? Do you mean the Marxist philosophy of science and nature? That is a subset of what is known as dialectical materialism (I don't think our page is very clear on the philosophy of nature aspects of it—it is really about hierarchical levels of knowledge that cannot affect one another, but that's a whole other story). Do you mean, the way in which Marxism calls itself a "science"? That is just hogwash with no methodology supporting it. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Probably not what you're looking for, but Ben Goldacre's Bad Science mentions Trofim Lysenko, a top Soviet biologist who: "thought natural selection was too individualistic, and spent his career growing plants really close together, in the hope they would develop collectivist tendencies." Dooky (talk) 15:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

That's amusing, but is not actually what Lysenko believed. Our page on Lysenko is much more accurate. He was scientifically wrong, but not for reasons that are very entertaining. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 15:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Historical Religious Flag

I need more information concerning an old flag with a red cross on the right side and the words "By This Sign Conquer" next to the cross. I have a picture of the flag. Need instructions to download the picture. Please contact me (here). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.178.27 (talk) 18:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

(I removed your contact info as per the instructions at the top of this page -SandyJax (talk) 18:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC))

The order of the Knights Templar uses a red cross and, on the seal, the Latin inscription "In hoc signo vinces". I could not find an image in WP, but there must be one in Google somewhere. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 18:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The actual Templars did not use that motto, so you've probably got a fake, or some modern recreation that claims to be Templars. "In hoc signo" was Constantine I's motto. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Oops, I must have mixed it up with that other saint, Simon Templar :) --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Meaning of the name Pen Argyl , and the people who founded the town .

The name Pen Argyl ( pronounced Pehn Argil , or Pehn Arjil ) derives from 2 words : Pen , meaning the mountain region ; Argyl , from the word " argylite " , a type of slate . Together , the two words mean " Mountain of Slate " . This name was giving to the town by the immigrants ( the ancestors or grandparents of the people of Pen Aygyl ) who arrived to the United States from the town of Delabole ; Cornwall , England . Many of the men arriving from Cownwall were slate quarry workers ; having worked in the Delabole Slate Quarry . They left their homeland because of lack of work in the tin mines . Many were forced to leave their homes and find work in other places in United Kingdom , Canada , United States , and Australia . With them they brought their history , language , culture , and recipes . Although they are English ; they prefer to be known as Cornish people . Their Food : The people of Pen Argyl are known for making two of their most popular Cornish dishes : Saffron Buns ( or Saffron Cake ), and their Cornish Pasties ( sometimes called English Pasties ) ; which is beef ( cubed or ground beef ) , onions , and diced - cubed potatoes ; stuffed in a half - folded pastry pie crust . They also like making Rhubarb Pie . Pen Argyl is the home of the famous " Mr. Pasties " pasty shop , where they make the pasties homemade ; home of " Weona Park " (pronounced : we - own - a - park )and its carousel . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.130.17.219 (talk) 23:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

This is the Wikipedia reference desk. Do you have a question? If not, you're probably lost. We have an article on Pen Argyl here. Algebraist 23:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I have copied the info onto the talk page there. 205... if you'd like to add this information to the article, find sources (references) in reliable books or magazines. Put that source in < source > into the text you are adding in the edit window. It will show up as a footnote. Good luck with your edit. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 02:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Pen Argyl is much better known these days for being the final resting place of Jayne Mansfield. Check out the photo of her tombstone in her article. --NellieBly (talk) 03:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)