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[edit]

Zhou Yi (周顗)[edit]

Who was the Jin Dynasty official Zhou Yi (周顗)? Can't read Chinese and all of this is copied and pasted. I think he inspired a Chinese idiom about killing Boren (another one of his name or something).--96.41.155.253 (talk) 08:09, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See King Yi of Zhou (Jian). Blooteuth (talk) 10:28, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Time period and characters don't match. No idea what you are meaning.--96.41.155.253 (talk) 18:08, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which of the seven possible Jin State dynasties or Subordinating Kingdoms are you referring to? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.129.108 (talk) 19:57, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is a wiki article on him but because it is in Chinese google translating it to English comes out to gibberish. Looking for a well written English biography of the individual.--96.41.155.253 (talk) 20:10, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is some info in the article on Wang Dao: "Although I did not kill Boren, Boren died because of me!" Boren (伯仁) was indeed Zhou Yi's style name. We have no article on Zhou Yi himself. He's mentioned on our disambiguation page Zhou Yi (Jin Dynasty) (269–322). The story can be found in the Book of Jin, vol 69. Wikisource has the original text of that volume, but I couldn't find an English translation, and Google Translate didn't help me much here either (the machine's translation of the relevant section begins with "Zhou 顗, the word Boren, the general son of Anton Jun also. Few re-name, God color show hard, although the generation of pro-sex, Mo can also also.") ---Sluzzelin talk 23:33, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Google translation problems are presumably at least partly due to trying to translate Classical Chinese with a tool calibrated to modern Chinese... AnonMoos (talk) 09:19, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What specifically do you want to know about him? In terms of basic information, he was born in 269AD and died in 322AD (famously killed by Wang Dao's cousin Wang Dun because of Wang Dao's inaction). He followed the Jin Court when it moved south, and was successively Minister of Personnel, Minister of Rites and Left Deputy Chancellor. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:09, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Instant wire transfer within the UK[edit]

Can money be transferred instantly within two UK bank accounts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.4.150.134 (talk) 21:18, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Generally No. According to the Association for Payment Clearing Services (APACS) cheque clearing operates on a three-day processing cycle.[1]. Of course anything might be pre-arranged if the bank agrees but expect extra Bank charges for express service. Blooteuth (talk) 22:09, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it can be done instantaneously via online banking, if you consider that a "wire transfer". But the catch is, you have to have the receiver's permission to access their account in that way, if only for depositing. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:13, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not "permission" (though obviously that should be sought), just their sort code and bank account number, obtained with or without permission. The electronic payment transfer usually appears on the recipients on-line statement within an hour or two, often much more quickly. Our article Electronic funds transfer gives very little detail. Is there a better article? Dbfirs 06:29, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, any company that publishes its bank details on its invoices or other correspondence is giving "permission" for its debtors to pay their debts online using that facility. What I meant is that you can't go around surreptitiously discovering someone's bank details and depositing money into their account without their knowledge or permission. Although, personally, I wouldn't object if I were the recipient. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:24, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See also BACS. Alansplodge (talk) 22:18, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is in the UK (or at least was until fairly recently) a method of transferring a (usually large) sum from an account (such as that of a firm of solicitors) in a branch of one bank to another account (such as that of another firm of solicitors or of an estate agency) in another bank with a nearby branch – involving an authorising document being literally "walked" from one to the other – and having the transferred sum being immediately credited to the receiving account. This might be necessary, for example, to complete the purchase of a property (e.g. a building) by close of business on the same day. The method is not generally known even to the ordinary counter staff in a bank, so only someone with a fairly deep knowledge of banking procedures will be able to arrange it by talking to more senior staff. My father used sometimes to arrange such transactions in his capacity as company accountant for a firm of solicitors. Unfortunately I don't know what this procedure is called. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.129.108 (talk) 07:20, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Instant", not really. See also CHAPS and Faster Payments. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 07:39, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For large payments years ago, you used to arrange a Banker's draft. Alansplodge (talk) 08:43, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article CHAPS suggests it's a form of Real-time gross settlement. The meaning of "Real-time" here is explained in our articles. I don't know about the UK implementation ans suspect it will vary from bank to bank and how much things are anyway but when I assisted in a RENTAS transaction in Malaysia I believe it was within an hour ~~each way~~ (probably almost instant, that was when I checked). Mind you, in both Malaysia and New Zealand, you can get almost instant transfers (I believe the standard is often within an hour each way but these tend to be faster than that) for low value low fee transactions too nowadays, although these probably aren't real-time. Nil Einne (talk) 09:56, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Faster Payments Service article needs updating. have we any experts? (That's the nearest you can get to "instant" without paying for a banker's draft, I think. When I use it, they usually guarantee credit to the payee within two hours.) The limit seems to be a quarter of a million in the UK. There's some information here. Dbfirs 09:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Personal anecdote: when I use this to transfer money from my bank account to my building society account (or vice versa), it tells me it should transfer within two hours, but invariably it has done it by the time I refresh the display. Iapetus (talk) 10:39, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Internal exile from Siberia[edit]

During much of the last couple of centuries of the Russian Empire, particularly problematic people in European Russia could be punished with internal exile to Siberia. What was done to residents of Siberia who performed comparable actions? Presumably the answer will vary from tsar to tsar, and maybe from shorter time period to shorter time period. Of course this wouldn't be much of an issue for people living in remote regions (I doubt the seventeenth-century pioneers at Yakutsk could have attracted any attention from Mikhail Fyodorovich's government), but probably there was plenty of attention paid to the large non-exile community in Irkutsk during the last decades of the Empire, for example. Nyttend (talk) 22:56, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS, we have an article on Exile to Siberia, but it's about a movie. Nyttend (talk) 23:00, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure they were too concerned about the non-Russian natives of Siberia, but if you were already exiled in Siberia and committed another crime, you could simply be exiled further east into Siberia (see Katorga). Adam Bishop (talk) 03:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recalling a dissolved Parliament[edit]

So in the UK, and other Parliamentary systems, there is a Recall_of_Parliament on certain occasions. But what happens if the Parliament is dissolved, as it is currently is due to the upcoming elections? Can the MPs still be recalled, or would they have to wait until after the election? 97.122.176.51 (talk) 23:21, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After a parliament is dissolved, there is no parliament to recall. The previous parliament has ceased to exist, and the next one has yet to be created. If something extraordinary were to happen during an election period, such as the death of the monarch or a nuclear attack on the country, there must be some protocol as to what happens to ensure the government and defence of the country doesn't just fall through some constitutional crack. What this is, though, I do not know. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 02:53, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although Parliament is dissolved, the Government is still in office, and of course the Civil Service continues working as normal. At any one moment, various Ministers, etc., may be involved in campaigning activities, but obviously they would drop everything and hotfoot it back to Whitehall if anything required it. For example, after last week's outrage in Manchester, there was a COBRA meeting the following day. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.129.108 (talk) 07:34, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

By way of a reference, this British newspaper article says: "...recalls were only possible because the Commons was temporarily not sitting rather than having been dissolved as is currently the case. Every seat in the House of Commons is currently vacant and the UK no longer has any MPs which means there is technically no parliament to recall.

"But we still have a Government? We do. The Government remains in place during the period of dissolution as, despite not being MPs, the Prime Minister is appointed by the Queen while ministers are appointed by the Queen on the advice of the PM. This enables ministers to look after their departments until a new administration is formed after polling day. This ensures that the UK is never without a government". Alansplodge (talk) 08:40, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note that on the day after the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing, the Government's COBRA committee met to oversee the response to the attack. [2] Alansplodge (talk) 08:40, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See Caretaker government. But the question was about parliament, not about government as such. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As a further question, what would happen if an urgent legislative change was needed while Parliament was dissolved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.23.25.63 (talk) 09:23, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What would be so urgent that it absolutely required parliamentary approval and could not wait for the impending election? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Legislation can be amended by a statutory instrument on the authority of a minister. At the start of both World Wars in the UK, a whole raft of emergency legislation was rushed through both houses within two or three days such as the National Service (Armed Forces) Act 1939 which was passed on the very same day. What would happen if Parliament had been dissolved, I don't know. I'm sure that something could be made-up on the spot which is the beauty of our flexible constitution. Alansplodge (talk) 11:53, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Let's hope we don't have to find out! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.13.250.184 (talk) 11:20, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Civil Contingencies Act 2004 gives HM Government wide-ranging powers to legislate in an emergency by Order in Council, or in extremis by ministerial decision. Such orders lapse after 30 days, but the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 limits the period between dissolution and convocation to 25 days, so even if the crisis erupts just after the Speaker shakes hands with the last MP to leave the chamber, the new Parliament could be back in business in time to rush through extensions. Matt's talk 20:32, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)See Purdah (pre-election period). According to the government [3] ministers of the Crown (apart from the Prime Minister herself) are appointed by the Prime Minister. For an analysis of how the system works see [4]. 86.148.116.248 (talk) 20:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's true in a colloquial sense, but formally speaking ministers are appointed by the Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister. Proteus (Talk) 12:16, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It depends whether polling day is able to go ahead though. If the crisis is severe enough, it would seem possible it wouldn't. Nil Einne (talk) 13:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The convoluted and complicated history of the Long Parliament and various intervening Parliaments may be of historical interest here. --Jayron 32 12:17, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Luckily, it don't work like that now. Alansplodge (talk) 12:39, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the plasticity of the British constitution may be seen as a great strength in this regard. --Jayron 32 12:54, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]