Humanities desk
< September 28	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	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 29[edit]

Airplane security[edit]

When did the US outlaw carrying loaded guns on airplanes? --67.185.172.158 (talk) 06:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Airplane security in general was stepped up in the 1970s, don't know about gun laws specifically though. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Early Seventies seems about right from what I've read, er, somewhere or other. —Tamfang (talk) 05:45, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I'm astonished that loaded guns were ever allowed on an aeroplane. Ah, those were innocent times. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 07:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they were also very different times in terms of how much it cost to ride on an aeroplane—when something is a luxury good you don't often worry about criminal abuse. (And I don't think anybody thought of airplanes as weapons for quite some time—the reforms in the 1970s were about hijacking and landing them in other countries and things like that, not ramming them into buildings.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 13:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For Norwegian domestic flights, innocense ended sometime in 2005. See last sentence in this article. Not a handgun, but still... Jørgen (talk) 10:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Before hijackings became common, there were no xray machines or scanners, so it is likely in the 1940's, 1950's or 1960's one could have carried a gun onto a plane without detection, even if there was a rule against it, as long as it was concealed and the bulge didn't show. It was only after the D. B. Cooper hijacking and hijackings by Palestinian terrorists that the Federal Aviation Authority in December 1972 ordered U.S. airlines to search all passengers and their bags. [1] Edison (talk) 04:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UK Redundancy Entitlement[edit]

If I continue to work in full-time employment after I reach the "normal" UK retirement age of 65, will this affect any redundancy entitlement? i.e. If I am a UK male aged 67 working full time for a small business which closes (I have continuous service of 10 years, salary £250 per week), what redundancy payments (if any) can I expect? Thanks sparkl_!sm ^hey! 08:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but we can't give that kind of advice here. Speak to your local Citizens Advice Bureau, or the personnel manager of your current employer, if they have one. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I endorse the advice to consult the CAB, but unless rules have changed in the last 10 years, redundancy entitlements tend to peak about 5 years before state retirement age and then taper off to nothing at retirement age. Do remember that state retirement ages are being increased in stages from 60 to 65 for women, then in stages over the next few decades from 65 to 68 for all. -- Arwel Parry _(talk) 21:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disappearance of libraries[edit]

Are libraries tending to disappear due to digital media? Mr.K. (talk) 15:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall seeing any concrete indication that libraries are disappearing, but I do see a lot of libraries adapting to serve more information digitally rather than on paper. -- Beland (talk) 18:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience, this does have the effect of restricting the amount of material available to visitors of university libraries, since the digital material is often accessible only by people with a university login code. I worry that the net effect of digital libraries is that certain information will become less readily available to the general public. —Kevin Myers 00:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I visited one a short time ago, and it was still quite easy to see. Edison (talk) 01:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the US, due to budget crises, funding of libraries is decreasing, so they aren't disappearing, but their hours of operation are being severely cut back. Corvus cornix_talk 19:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheap bailout[edit]

Isn't the bailout rather cheap, comparing with the cost of the Iraq war?Mr.K. (talk) 16:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The proposed bailout costs less than the Iraq war. Whether they can be meaningfully compared is another question entirely, and one not suited to the reference desk. — Lomn 16:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the same vein, the new Woodrow Wilson bridge near Washington D.C. costs less than an Enterprise-class aircraft carrier. But the bridge isn't well suited to military aircraft, while the carrier isn't long enough to accommodate much auto traffic. --- OtherDave (talk) 10:46, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have found that appendectomiesin the U.S. can be cheaper [2] than new cars, [3] , but they are likewise not interchangeable in utility. Edison (talk) 04:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lets just say that they're both ridiculously expensive. 90.235.17.83 (talk) 15:27, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What were women's role in the Southern Colonies of British Colonial Americas.[edit]

Besides the usual tasks that women did during that time. What different roles did women in the Southern Colonies have compared to women in the New England and Middle Colonies? What impacts did they make while performing their roles?

Sign: Glen Shepard 9/29/2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glenshepard (talk • contribs) 16:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A real life reference librarian would not scold a questioner who had homework to do, but would suggest references, such as Wikipedia articles and other reliable sources where the needed information can be found. Please do not respond to questions with bitey non-answers. Some information, if not a simple answer to the questions, can be found at European colonization of the Americas , Outside Wikipedia there is Colonial America 1600-1775 K12 Resources . The preparation of food in colonial times is discussed at[4] A source on the role of women in colonial America is [5]. Women often cared for children in colonial America, and info on this can be found in a thesis at [6]. A visual presentation of material on women in colonial America is found at [7]. The roles of mothers and fathers in colonial America is covered at [8] , and you may find this extremely useful. [9] is a good discussion of love and marriage in colonial America. Edison (talk) 19:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When researching your answer, keep in mind that the question doesn't seem to be limited to white women, which should broaden the scope of your reading. —Kevin Myers 00:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the links, the info provided helped me a lot. Almost every article I found on the topic always gave a dole view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glenshepard (talk • contribs) 13:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How did members of congress vote on the bailout today?[edit]

I would like to see who voted for and against. Tried to find a tally of the vote online but couldn't. Can anyone help? --Halcatalyst (talk) 19:31, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The House members' votes are listed and broken down in various ways here, among other places. Deor (talk) 20:10, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Answering my own question -- see the New York Times article. --Halcatalyst (talk) 00:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish Dietary Law Regarding the Consumption of Insects[edit]

The Kashrut article states that "The consumption of insects involves between three and six violations of Torah law;[37] so, according to Jewish Law, it is a greater sin than the consumption of pork." I would like to know what those violations of Torah law are. Thanks. --Nanonanette (talk) 21:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

613 Mitzvot? AnonMoos (talk) 09:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These violations of Torah law can be found in the following places: Leviticus chapter 11 verses 10, 41, 42, 43, 44, Deuteronomy chapter 14 verses 10, 19. Simonschaim (talk) 10:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

American military history, 1943[edit]

This is from the article Dinah Shore:

"To support the troops overseas, who liked her singing, she participated in USO tours to Europe. She met a young actor ready to go into military service named George Montgomery. They married on December 3, 1943. Despite their marriage, Montgomery soon went into service."

The last sentence is odd IMO. It seems to suggest that Montgomery had a choice in the matter. Is it likely that he had? Opinion please. Wanderer57 (talk) 21:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Marital status wasn't one of the draft exemptions. Actual candidates for avoiding service could include fatherhood or war-essential occupations in addition to the well-known 4-F physical disqualification. — Lomn 21:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article George Montgomery seems to imply that he wasn't drafted—rather, that he volunteered (before his marriage) for service in the Army Air Corps. Deor (talk) 21:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Anthropocide?"[edit]

I'm trying to make a new word that means The Death of All-Man, Woman & Child w/o Discrimination. I'm not looking for Genocide, Ethnocide, Gendercide or other relative word(s) but the Death of All-Humans...something like Dehumanization. —Preceding unsigned comment added by L3tt3rz (talk • contribs) 22:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is really a continuation of your question of the Language desk, and not a new question. In any case, it's better asked on the Language desk than here. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]