Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2007 November 10

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.

November 10

French Revolution

How did the blue, white, and red become the colours of the French Revolution? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.133.79 (talk) 02:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

see Flag of France, though as with all such ex-post-facto explanations, there's a certain amount of bogusness in them.... - Nunh-huh 02:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It was just an idea that came out of the blue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.4.1 (talk) 07:14, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

French Revolution 2

How does Mme. Defarge embody the French Revolution? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.133.79 (talk) 02:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Read the book! - Nunh-huh 02:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Even if you have only read the page you have linked, 76.64, you should already have some idea that Dickens intends her to represent the spirit of revenge, of the destructive chaos which accompanied the Revolution, expressed at its fullest during the Reign of Terror. Clio the Muse 02:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

thread tracking

The Wikipedia is designed to provide thread tracking based on user name. Although most topics covered here are not sensitive, is it possible that at sometime in the future a persons name could be connected to their user name and all of their opinions, questions, and comments revealed? If so shouldn't a warning be provided to new users that except for their real name not being connected to their user name that everything they do on the Wikipedia is tracked, including far more detail than would be necessary to make even the SS not ask for more? Dichotomous 03:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Um, Wikipedia is pretty explicit about tracking contributions, revision histories, etc. Anything people submit to any websites is potentially "trackable" and people should exercise common sense about it. In any case, I'm not sure why knowing people's opinions, questions, and comments is so scary. People are offering the opinions, questions, and comments up freely. Whether those opinons, questions, and comments correlate to their "real life identity" is entirely a separate issue at times, and one which pertains to how much they make public about their "real life identity". In any case, on the bottom of the "create a new account" screen it does say: "Your username will frequently appear publicly on the site; editors who use their real names have sometimes been subjected to harassment. See the pros and cons of using your real name." Since all of the above information pertains to being able to connect your real name to your user name, as a whole that warning should suffice, no? --24.147.86.187 04:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Dichotomous will correct me if I am wrong, I am sure, but I believe the point is more about if or when one's real-life identity is attached to one's Wikipedia name, then everything one has ever written here is immediately available in a way that is not even that easy in one's own, personal email files, for example. If the opinions one expresses on Wikipedia are the same opinions expressed in real life, and they are also addressed in real life to a very large and public audience, then that person has no concerns. Even with the warnings at registration, how many editors write either extreme forms of their opinions or just extreme opinions, whether or not such are held in real life? I seem to recall reading about someone who was refused entry into either Canada or the US because of a comment on Wikipedia linked to his name, though made by someone else. How much more damaging could some of the risks we take here be on our real-life situations? For most of us, there is no problem. We say here what we would say in our daily lives, and with the same force and (lack of) openness. For others, however, this is not true, or perhaps, will not be true in the future. What 16-year-old, of whom there are many vocal representatives here in Wikipedia, knows how a careless or angry comment could colour the rest of his/her life. Would those of us who are now, say, over 35, want to be held accountable for, or just held to, all the opinions we had at 16? (I certainly wouldn't. My taste in poetry alone, while not likely to cause me to lose a job, or be put on trial, would certainly be an embarrassment.) (Before all the 16-year-olds reading this start writing rebuttals about their opinions and tastes, I grant you that I may have been the exception and that today's 16-year-olds may be so much more sophistciated than they were in my era, that everything they write today will be relevent in the same way 25 years from now. However, just in case that isn't true . . .) Wikipedia is not like writing in a diary, or writing to a circle of close friends; it is like standing on the front steps of the town hall with a microphone and a brass band, hollering "Hear ye! Hear ye!" Having said all that, I can't think of any wording of a warning or any reminders, short of flashing lights on every page, that will keep those who talk/write first, and think later, from possibly doing themselves, and frequently others, harm. There is no real anonymity here, or anywhere else. Bielle 05:28, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure all of us will say things under the cloak of anonymity that we might not say under our real name, be they negative or positive. In fact, the opportunity for anonymity is one of the great attractions in my opinion of sites that support the use of a user names (most sites). Its just that on other sites I can erase what I have said so that there is no official trace (although a post I have made and want to erase may have already been quoted by another user). On the Wikipedia all traces of everything including minor punctuation errors are recorded in absolute detail and permanently for all posterity whether you want it to be or not. The question I'm asking is whether new users have sufficient warning that this is in fact the case in light of the possibility, if not likelihood, that a connection between real and user name could at some time in the future be made. Dichotomous 16:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware there is no warning of any kind. Whether that is "sufficient warning" (based on the assumption that everyone ought to be aware already that essentially the whole net is an open book) or not, I don't know, but I have my doubts about the effectiveness of any explicit warning. I see people post the most amazing things under their own names that I'm sure (or in any case sure hope) they will be embarrassed about in a couple of years. There may be good reasons for not leaving clues about your identity: rhere have been cases of Wikipedians who were harassed in real life for their contributions on Wikipedia by people who found out their real identities; for some information that is generally accepted in most of the world, revealing it is considered treason in some not fully democratic countries; and there are people here who sympathize with violent extremist groups. That is, however, largely independent of the ease with which all contributions of a given user can be examined.  --Lambiam 22:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

You could always get a bureaucrat to change your username to something anonymous. This applies retrospectively to your contributions. You might also want to read Wikipedia:Right to vanish. --Dweller 10:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Indian politics

What is Prime Ministers Manmohan Singhs opinion on Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale?

Thank you

77.105.15.153 03:35, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Health Care in South Africa

I am looking for resources relating to the history of health care in South Africa. I am especially interested in the differences between health care in the apartheid era and today. Thanks!

76.101.127.148 05:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Stalin the agent

Is it true that Stalin was an agent for the tsarist secret police? Stockmann 06:50, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

This story was broken by Life magazine in April 1956, three years after Stalin's death. Life had got hold of a photograph of a letter which appeared to have been written by a Colonel Eremin in 1913, claiming that Stalin had been an agent and police informer during the years 1906-1912. You can read about the affair here. The trouble is, in such a repressive society as Russia was in the early 20th century, few people in political life completely trusted anyone, and there were always a mass of rumours and fabrications. Stalin was notorious for bending the truth about his past. No doubt it would have suited all kinds of people, both at the time and later, to claim that Josef Vissarionovich had been a secret agent for the police, but it must be at least possible, and there are historians who say that whether the Eremin letter is genuine or not, there is enough other circumstantial evidence to mean that what the letter says is probably about right. We know that Stalin (as he later became) joined a socialist group before leaving the Tiflis Seminary in 1899 (or else before being expelled from it, depending on who you believe), that he soon became active in socialist politics, and that between 1902 and 1917 he was sent off to Siberia several times. Some of the few reliable sources for Stalin's early life are police reports, but even they are doubtful.

I'll be interested to see what Clio has to say about this, she knows a lot about Stalin. Xn4 16:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It's an old, old story, Xn4 and Stockmann, an accusation first raised by the Menshevik Isidore Ramishvili as far back as 1905. The accusation made its way down the years. It was later alleged that the file compiled on Stalin by the Okhrana, the Tsarist secret police, passed round the Party in the 1920s, and that he even instigated the Great Terror to eliminate all those who were aware of his dubious background. It is all nonsense, of course. There is no reliable evidence to suggest that Stalin was ever a Tsarist agent. It is true that the Okhrana had agents among the Bolsheviks and other left-wing factions, operating at all levels. But they were only effective for as long as they were undetected and at liberty. Stalin was imprisoned and exiled too frequently to have been a police agent. Indeed, he spent the whole of the Great War right up the February Revolution of 1917 in Siberia, a time when his services as an informer would have been most productive. However, this is not to say that he did not make use of the Okhrana as an instrument for his own ends. Josef Vissarionovich, or Soso, or Koba, or Stalin, was one of the most unscrupulous men who ever lived; part gangster, part intellectual, part hitman, part revolutionary. There was literally nothing he would stop at in pursuit of his political ends; and if this meant dropping a Menshevik or two into the lap of the Okhrana, well, so be it. It might even be suggested that far from working for the Okhrana, the Okhrana was working for him. For those who are interested in this question I would warmly recommend Simon Sebag Montefiore's Young Stalin (2007) particularly Part II Chapter 25, headed 'The Milkman: Was Stalin a Tsarist Agent?' Clio the Muse 03:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Clio, I haven't seen the book you recommend, Young Stalin, but I've put it on my list. I was cautious of giving an opinion above because I'm not well enough informed, but everything you say rings true with me. Being what he was, it's hard to believe Stalin wouldn't have shopped people to the Okhrana when it suited him. Xn4 09:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You may also be interested, Xn4, in Montefiore's earlier work Stalin: the Court of the Red Tsar, which deals with the later part of his career. It's a superb piece of scholarship. Clio the Muse 23:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Clio, I'll have a go at that, too. (It might amuse you, by the side of my bed I've got The Last Voyage of the Valentina, one of Santa Montefiore's entertainments!) Xn4 00:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Just the thing to 'ski' you into the land of dreams! Clio the Muse 01:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

French Revolution 3

In the context of the revolution what or who was the Indulgents?Fearless Frodo 12:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

In short, they were a 'moderate' (that is, less extreme) faction of French revolutionaries, represented in the Jacobin Club by such men as Danton and Desmoulins. The term is thought to have been coined early in 1794 by Robespierre, after Danton (alarmed by the extremes of the Reign of Terror) had suggested setting up a Committee of Clemency. Xn4 15:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. But wasn't Danton originally in favour of the terror? What was it that made him turn against it? What were the political or ideological factors that made him change his mind? What purpose did the terror have and when did this purpose cease to be important in his mind? Sorry so many questions. Thanks for your help.Fearless Frodo 19:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It depends what you mean by The Terror. It's going too far to say that Danton was originally in favour of it if by 'The Terror' you mean the full horror of what developed. He was a mover in the setting up of the Revolutionary Tribunal, and the aims of that included ending the excesses of the Paris mob. He was also one of the founding members of the Committee of Public Safety. In the event, the Revolutionary Tribunal promoted the Terror, but Danton wasn't one of the enthusiastic supporters of its extremes in the way that the odious Hébert and his 'Madmen' (Enragés or Exagérés) were. Xn4 00:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, actually, Danton was indeed one of proponents of terror as a political instrument, one that he believed was needed in the face of the emergency the revolution faced, both at home and abroad. It was he who was the driving force behind the September massacres; it was he who coined the slogan "Terror is the order of the day", which he announced before the Convention But, as I have said, for Danton Terror was an instrument for dealing with the exceptional; it was not an end in itself. When the emergency receded, as it did after the victories at Hondschoote and the Wattignies, the imperative for the Terror had been removed. Clio the Muse 02:53, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps the crunch point here is that Danton (one of the more thoughtful lovers of terror) suggested setting up a Committee of Clemency, which led to Robespierre using the word indulgent. The Terror had just run out of control. Xn4 09:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Philosophy books

Hi. I've not long acquired a load of philosphy books from a relative, titles by Hegel, Collingwood, Kant, Bergson, Sartre, Wittgenstein, Husserl and so on. I would like to read them but am not quite sure where to start. Should I do so by nationality, chronological order, what? Thanks for any advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.15.130 (talk) 13:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

You definitely don't have the easiest to read there. Maybe going through the wikipedia articles about these authors might inform your reading. I would see 2 approaches here. 1.) You either want to make your own opinion of these authors and studiously read them in chronological order (since most of these could be classified as part of the phenomenology school of thought they refer a lot to each other if not always directly) and read critics and commentaries on them afterwards to further understand (and for some of them to just simply understand what they are on about). 2.)Or you would like a better understanding of philosophy in general through reading the authors and as such I would recommend you read a small history of philosophy book or college textbook to place your authors in a context without which they might seem irrelevant. You might even want to get companion books, i.e. books written by commentators to read along yours to better understand their meaning. Note that this will very much influence your reading as when you will be going through your books you will often be looking for what you know already of these authors instead of interpreting yourself what you read. The second approach I think is the easiest and most efficient but it might take some of the sense of discovery out of your reading. The first approach is the hardest but I would say the most rewarding and most "brain training" of the two, it runs the risk of putting you off these complicated texts though. Happy reading! Keria 14:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Without context, these will make tough reading. I recommend the novel Sophie's World as a companion- it's engaging, amusing, and functions as an entry-level history of philosophy; it might help you make the connections that will help you make use of your philosophy collection. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you a mountaineer, 217.43? Sorry, you probably think that is an odd question, but if you know anything about mountaineering you will undestand that beginners should start the sport gently. They should not be sent off to climb the Himalayas! Now, on the assumption that you are a total novice, with no background at all in metaphysics, epistimology and ontology, you are about to climb the philosophical equivalent of the Himalayas! I would hate to see you fall at the first obstacle; and without a guide the obstacles are virtually insurmountable. I think your best course of action, before you open a single page of the books you have, is to get a hold of a good introduction to philosophical issues. Some years ago I read Anthony Flew's Thinking about Thinking, which I greatly enjoyed. There are other such general works which will provide you with good grounding in the subject, the thread of Ariadne to see you through the labyrinth. And watch out for the minotaur! Clio the Muse 02:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Excellent suggestions so far. I would only add that if you're determined to read the books "as they are" without a companion guide or something, you may find the Wittgenstein stuff a bit more accessible to you. While the concepts are just as 'out there' as any other philosopher's, he at least uses straightforward English when he can. probably comes from his time with Russell. Matt Deres 17:22, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll disagree that Wittgenstein is a good place to start, if you don't know what he's on about. Without the proper context, it's difficult to know what to make of his almost cryptic language. "The world is everything that is the case." Sure, the language is simple, but the ideas are deceptively not-so. And then agree with Clio and add Think, by Simon Blackburn, as a nice primer to what is contained in those books. Llamabr 02:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Last Letter Home

An article in the MEN contains this section about a soldier who was killed by a landmine in Afghanistan:

Ronnie and Sheryl Downes also revealed the emotional contents of Tony's last letter home.

In the letter he wrote that he `did what he had to do' and added: "Please do not be mad at what has happened. I did what I had to do and serving the British Army was it.

"I am up in heaven looking down on you all. I will always be there with you. "Again, don't be sad. Celebrate my life because I love you and I will see you all again.""

My question is, do soldiers prepare some special 'last letter home' to be sent in the event of their death, or had he just written this expecting that he would die? This isn't really about this particular soldier, more about military practice in general. Obviously I'm asking from a UK perspective, but insight into other countries' practices is welcome as well. Skittle 14:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It would depend on each soldier, of course. In this particular case, as I recall from previous coverage, this was written in a letter he had prepared to be read in the event of his death, rather than as literally the last letter he wrote home. -- Arwel (talk) 15:50, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

As writing such letters is rather morbid and demoralising, I shouldn't think it's a practice any military institution encourages. FiggyBee 05:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Companies giving shares to employees

If a company gives shares to an employee (eg. a new director), from where do they acquire them? Are they just bought on the open market? If so, why not just give the employees more money? Is it a backdoor trick to push the share prices up? 203.221.127.81 14:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It is possible to issue new shares with the agreement of a majority of shareholders, and I believe that this is the typical method of arranging employee stock option plans. Creating new shares out of thin air naturally reduces the value of existing shares - see stock dilution. 84.239.133.38 11:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Today, most stock-option plans are a part of the intial purchase offering (IPO) approval obtained from the local stock exchange. (I write specifically about Canada here, but I believe the principles apply elsewhere.) The company, as part of its approval, will have an authorized number of shares and an issued number of shares, where the former is the larger number. These excess shares are kept in the corporate treasury which was once a carefully controlled vault filled with actual, numbered share certificates. Now, the share certificates are notional, for the most part, the holding and tranfers being all electronic records. The "authorized but unissued shares" will be limited to a specific number and designated for a specific purpose, of which employee stock-purchase plans are one potential use. The number and purpose will have been approved by both the stock exchange and the shareholders. Once these two elements are approved, the actual process of distribution of those shares is a matter for the board of directors. Only if the number of shares required to meet the needs of the plan eventually exceed the number of "authorized but unissued" shares held in the corporate treasury will the board of directors have to go back to both the shareholders and the stock exchange to get approval to issue more shares. The company may also buy back its own shares on the open market to meet such needs, but this is rarely the case. The local stock exchange has to be notified of such an activity, but I am not sure whether it must also approve it. The board of directors certainly must approve.

A stock-option plan usually gives employees a right to buy shares at a certain price, generally at or below market at a specific point in time, but the option is usually open for a period of time, sometimes exceeding multiple years. If the market price of the shares goes up, and the option is still open, employees can buy at the offered price. Some buy and hold, others buy and then immediately sell them on the open market. (Employees are constrained in doing the latter, except at specific times of the year, if they are an officer or owner of the company, or, I think, on its board; most other employees, who are not deemed to have insider information, may sell at any time.) The stock offering is given to employees as a bonus that, unlike mere money, also gives the added incentive to make the company a better, more productive place so that their own personal share capital will grow. That's a really indirect way of increasing the share price, and while a good thing, it is not likely to have an short-term effect on share prices. Buying up stock to meet a stock-option plan would be a very long process and also not likely to have any immediate effect, or perhaps even any effect at all, given the current regulatory climate. Bielle 18:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

History Role Playing Games

Does anyone know of any good role playing games (RPGs) with an historical theme, especially based on Ancient Rome? I'm not interested in those combat simulation games, with geeky figurines and all that, but rather ones that capture the historical essence of a period, and compel the player to learn something about the times in order to succeed. In short, I want an education in history in the form of an RPG (to make it interactive, and to encourage my apathetic friends to play). Any ideas, or similar suggestions are most welcome. 203.221.127.81 14:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• You could start here [1] - No idea if any are any good - have a read of the PDF files. Exxolon 19:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
  • How about this one? [2] Exxolon 19:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

As an aside, I'd imagine that historical rpgs that are aiming for anything like accuracy are extremely deadly to PCs. Without modern medicine or magical healing, any injury is potentially lethal due to infection, the mechanisms of which were not properly understood until the mid 1800s. Not to mention disease, parastic infection and a host of other problems. Since a lot of RPGs have at least some element of danger (combat etc) in them I'd imagine you'd spend a lot of time dying in a historical RPG! Exxolon 19:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, or not actually fighting as much as one would want to in a game. --24.147.86.187 21:09, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about a computer RPG based on Roman history (been looking for one myself, please let me know if you've found one), but have you had a look at Rome: Total War? It's an RTS game with some RPG elements (which might not be quite what you're looking for), and its depiction of Roman history is pretty flawed in several respects, but the basic atmosphere of trying to manage an empire in classical antiquity is pretty well done, and it allows you to learn quite a bit about ancient history while playing. I think I can say I've played pretty much every Rome-themed game on the PC, and Rome: Total War was the only one that made me feel like reliving a bit of Roman history while playing. -- Ferkelparade π 02:29, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for those suggestions. I'm definitely interested in dice games rather than computer games. Any further suggestions welcome. 203.221.127.56 17:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

You may be interested in dredging up a copy of The Republic of Rome. — Lomn 14:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Lomn. Not a RPG but not a heavy war game either.Polypipe Wrangler 22:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The Thinker

The other day, in the Yale University Art Gallery, I came across a statue by Auguste Rodin called The Thinker. There was no reason to believe that it is a replica, as it was surrounded by works of Monet, Van Gogh, and the like. Our article on The Thinker make no reference of a cast existing at Yale. Is this a shortcoming of our article or is there another explanation? Plasticup ^T/C 16:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I found the following reference on the Yale University Art Gallery website [3], using its "Search" function:

... A group of bronze sculptures by Jean (Hans) Arp, Max Ernst, Alberto Giacometti, Henri Matisse, Isamu Noguchi, and Auguste Rodin, among others, lent by a private collector. ... [4]

I couldn't get the link at the end of the text to work, but I assume that the statue you saw is perhaps one of the many versions done by Rodin, or other copies. Bielle 19:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

So he made several miniature casts of the larger, more famous work? Plasticup ^T/C 19:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

No the original was small - it is on top of The Gates of Hell doorway. Rmhermen 22:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Which Castle?

I've just seen Elizabeth-the Golden Years. In it Mary Queen of Scots is shown imprisoned in Fotheringay Castle, a really dramatic looking building by a lake. Your article on Fotheringay says there is very little left, so it's obviously not the same place. My question is what and where is the castle depicted in the movie? Also can some of the history buffs here tell me if the movie is accurate or not in its depiction of people and events? 217.43.9.117 17:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

With regards to your second question, I've not seen the film myself, but if it's anything like its predecessor, I wouldn't bet on it being accurate beyond (very) broad brushstrokes. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Imdb gives the filming locations on this page, the only castle on the list is the one at Eilean Donan. The film has come under fire from a number of quarters for inaccuracies including this article - Catholics condemn 'twisted' Elizabeth film. Foxhill 17:48, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

There is also a list of inaccuracies in our article on the film at Elizabeth: The Golden Age#Dramatic licence. Foxhill 17:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I haven't seen it either, but she was executed at Fotheringay Castle - just not imprisoned there. Presumably, it was in a better state of repair back then than it is now. -- JackofOz 23:50, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the castle is indeed Eilean Donan in the Highlands of Scotland. Like the movie, the castle itself is a fiction, or a fantasy recreation. The original Eilean Donan was destroyed by naval bombardment in 1719. Not long before it had, ironically, been occupied by Spanish troops, part of a mini Jacobite Armada. The building shown in the movie is a twentieth century recreation. Elizabeth? Enjoy the drama; ignore the history. Clio the Muse 02:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Norman Mailer

After reading Norman Mailer's obituary, I did some very quick research ... and I could not find an answer to this question. Does anyone know why his (clearly) non-fiction book The Executioner's Song (which details the crime, trial, and execution of real-life murderer Gary Gilmore) would be awarded a Pulitzer Prize for Fiction? Am I missing something here? Thank you. (Rest in Peace, Mr. Mailer.) (Joseph A. Spadaro 18:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC))

I haven't read this book but I'm guessing that it falls into the same category as Truman Capote's In Cold Blood, that of the Nonfiction novel. Clio the Muse 02:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I have, it does. DuncanHill 02:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I love that book, which is written in a totally different voice/style from Mailer's (somewhat bombastic) nonfiction prose--it's pared-down, minimalist and to-the-point. It's engrossing; read it!--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 02:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Guinness Book of World Records 2006 UK edition

In the article on Maurizio Giuliano, "Guinness Book of World Records 2006 (UK edition), page 126" is given as source for supporting that he was "the youngest person to visit all independent nations" at 23. I cannot verify this though. I have no access to this book. If anybody has such book, could he check what it is the precise wording of the alleged record, so that the article can be verified and improved? Thanks a lot. (Google Books does not offer to search inside this version). --Edcolins 19:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

War memories

I'm writing a paper on attitudes towards the outbreak of the First World War. As part of this I'm looking for a quote from one of the men who went to war which illustrates something of the mood of the day. Hope you can help. 217.43.9.117 21:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I can think of nothing better than the sentiments expressed by Ernst Jünger at the outset of In Stahlgewittern (Storm of Steel)-"Grown up in an age of security, we shared a yearning for danger, for the experience of the extraordinary. We were enraptured by war." Clio the Muse 02:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Wilfred Owen wrote to his mother in November 1914 "Walking abroad, one is the admiration of all little boys, and meets an approving glance from every eye of eld." In a letter to The Morning Post published on 30 September 1914, a Mrs Berridge wrote "If my own son can best serve England at this juncture by giving his life for her, I would not lift one finger to bring him home. If any act or word of mine should interfere with or take from him his grandest privilege, I could never look him in the face again." Xn4 20:19, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Admiral von Tirpitz wrote to his wife in October 1914 "This war is really the greatest insanity in which white races have ever been engaged." Xn4 20:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The opinion towards World War I was quite different in American. Even within America different racial and economic groups tended to hold widely divergent opinions about the war. In general the sentiment in the U.S. during the early part of the war was quit isolationist if I remember my history correctly. --S.dedalus 22:01, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Political Futures Markets

It's one thing to say a candidate will win an election, it's quite another to have to bet a sum of money on it. If it has been consistently proven that political futures markets more accurately predict the outcome of elections over any standard polling that could possibly take place, why are the results of these markets not more popular in the media than standard polling results? Sappysap 23:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Political futures markets are very new and not widely known among the public. Polling has been ongoing for decades, and firms like Gallup are well-established. Polling can also be used to track the "horse race" leading up to an election. Pollsters have tended to be quite accurate in assessing support for candidates in recent U.S. elections, problems with exit polling notwithstanding. Finally, there's something to be said for reporting what samples of people are actually thinking rather than what groups of people are betting other groups of people are going to do. -- Mwalcoff 23:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

"In The Air Tonight"

Hello, I'm trying to see how I would write the drum notation for Phil Collin's top single in 1981, "In The Air Tonight"? I'm learning both how to play the keyboards and drums and most notably trying to write the music and play it on keyboards, and just writing the drum notation for it seems a little challegning. Can someone help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.251.209.117 (talk) 23:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

MAybe you should ask the Cadbury Gorilla... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.71.67.126 (talk) 05:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Very funny. I can't help you actually transcribe the song, but there are some pretty decent transcriptions available online that were created using Guitar Pro software, one of my favorite programs in the whole world. Just now, I found a transcription that include both drum and keyboard notation. GuitarPro is great for this type of thing and has helped me learn many a song; just keep in mind that the transcriptions very greatly in quality from flawless to laughable.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 11:44, 11 November 2007 (UTC)