Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 August 28

= August 28 =

Architectural style of church


Is there any clear style of architecture for St. Mary's Catholic Church in Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, pictured here? Its date of construction is 1872, if that helps at all. Nyttend (talk) 01:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd say it's a case of understated Gothic revival inspired by brick Gothic antecedents. Marco polo (talk) 02:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There's something vaguely dutch about the roof (but not specifically dutch church like) - any dutch settlers?83.100.250.79 (talk) 11:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I think what you see as Dutch is really a feature of the Hanseatic (North Sea–Baltic Sea) brick Gothic. I think you will see structures like this in Germany, Scandinavia, and Poland as well.  Since this is in western Pennsylvania, I would suspect a Polish or German presence.  Marco polo (talk) 15:20, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes -it was the gambrel roof that made me think that, to be honest I'm not familiar with 'new world' architecture - it may well have a specific name.83.100.250.79 (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It seems to be an eclectic sort of Gothic Revival style. As Marco polo says, the rooflines have northern and eastern European influences, and the origins of the church's founders might provide clues. I see a Polish or Bohemian/Moravian/Slovak influence more than anything else.   Acroterion  (talk)  21:17, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * This got me reading gambrel and hip roof, and I come away with the understanding that the nearmost gable on the left side wall is an example of a half-hip roof, rather than a gambrel roof. fwiw. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The half-hip seems to only go half the way - mansard roof looks a lot more like it, but I'm not sure if a mansard roof requires living space underneath it. "Hipped gambrel" seems right, and is different from "hip gambrel"
 * half-hip gambrel
 * It's not a gambrel in any sense - the side on view confused me.83.100.250.79 (talk) 11:30, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if this church could be correctly classified as such, but you may want to have a look at Polish Cathedral style. — Kpalion(talk) 19:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

References for Winston I. Nunes
I have been working on the page I created for Winston I. Nunes (I know, I just started it live by accident because I am new here!) and think that this man is notable due to his relation to Benny Hinn and with his involvement in the Latter rain movement. However, his name does not yield many hits on the internet. My grandfather was give an ultimatum by the superintendant of the Assemblies of God in Canada in '62 to leave the Pentecostal church which he was an elder or they would fire the pastor, after hearing that he had attended only one of Winston Nunes meeting. I am not sure whether they feared loosing members to Nunes or if there was prejudism involved, Nunes being a malato gentleman from Trinadad. The latter rain movement was so quickly extinguished by the AG that it has remained hiden in the dark these many years. In any case, '''If anyone can look at this page and see if it merrits being saved I would appreciate it. Or if there is 3rd party reference material out there that I do not know of on Nunes.'''

--Enikk (talk) 02:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) I know that Nunes was asked to work with Billy Graham. Where Graham was to tour part of the Country and Nunes the other.  But I cannot find a reference.  Nunes apparently turned him down because he did not want to be limited to just a gospel message.
 * 2) I know that he taught Benny Hinn the Bible and was his mentor. Hinn has said this on T.V. and I know it is references several times in his books, but have not been able to list a quote.  My Grandmother said that she remembers Benn Hinn asking questions and taking notes during Nunes bible studies and Nunes once said to him, "Benny you remember this, because one day you will be famous and forget us!"  Unfortunately my Grandmother never published any of the history of Nunes Church, so it is non-verifiable.
 * 3) Nunes' only book was printed by Benny Hinns ministry. Benny Hinn has several exerts from this book on his site.
 * 4) I have a reference that he imparted the Spirit to John Robert Stevens, but I have no information refering to thier relationship.
 * 5) I have found a reference that links him to the Bethesda Missionary Temple, one of the hubs of the Latter day movement. However, I do not know what that relationship was.
 * 6) Nunes also did radio broadcasts. But I cannot find where, with who, or in what period of time.
 * 7) Nunes was also on T.V. with David Maines of 100 Huntley Street (now Crossroads in Toronto). many times (they even filmed live at Nunes' Church).  But I cannot find out the information on this either.
 * 8) Nunes was the son of the Governor of Trinadad, but I cannot even figure out from the list in Wikipedia who his father was. Are any missing?  What am I missing?  I though for a moment that my verbal source was wrong.  Maybe he is the son of the Governor of the 'Bank' of Trinadad, or something similar.  I have emails out to the current pastors of his Church and others who might have this info, but I seem to be at a standstill.


 * If you read WP:BIO carefully and compare the criteria with the verifiable facts you can find on this fellow, I think you'll agree that he does not seem to meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. I'd recommend deletion myself based on this.  Tempshill (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Cutlery illegal for under 18 in UK?
Is this picture real? Do people in the UK seriously use cutlery as weapons? Those knifes aren't even sharp. F (talk) 03:59, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Sharp kitchen knives certainly qualify as offensive weapons (unless you have a good reason for having them - for example, you use them for chopping vegetables and they are in your kitchen). The Offensive Weapons Act 1996 says the sale of "any knife" to an under 16 (I think that was later amended to under 18) is illegal. Unless "knife" has a different definition to lawyers than to real people (which is entirely possible), it would apply to the knives in that picture. I guess it is difficult to clearly draw a line between knives like that that aren't dangerous and sharp knives that are ("sharp" isn't precise enough). It does result in some rather silly rules, though - the fork in those sets is probably more dangerous than the knife, but wouldn't be illegal to sell on their own (the Act does discuss items with sharp points, but the relevant section only applies to items with sharp points that are specifically designed/adapted for harming people). --Tango (talk) 04:11, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * How do they handle common every-day-carry things like pocket knives? It's relatively common here in USA for someone under 18 to carry a Swiss army knife. (But not to school) Especially if they happen to be in the Boy Scouts. APL (talk) 06:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * As has been pointed out below, we're talking about buying, not possessing. Possessing a knife is allowed if and only if you have a good reason. There is an exception for "folding, non-locking blade less than 3 inches in length", which is for pocket knives, you can carry them whenever you like. For any other knife you need a good reason for carrying it. A hunting knife while you are out hunting would be perfectly fine (as long as you don't actually attack of threaten somebody with it). A chef carrying a set of kitchen knives to work is fine. Having kitchen knives in your kitchen is fine. Etc. If you don't have a good reason, any bladed or pointed object other than a pocket knife is an offensive weapon. Anything (knife or otherwise) used as an offensive weapon is an offensive weapon as well. Some types of knife (such as flick knives) are completely banned, nobody is allowed them for any reason. --Tango (talk) 14:36, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

First I thought it must be the shopkeeper being silly or hysterical, but apparently the law really does apply to ordinary table knives: knife law in the UK. But this is only to do with selling them, and if a chef can carry a meat cleaver to work in the street, then scouts and guides are presumably allowed their knives in the woods.--Rallette (talk) 07:59, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Just a little note: it should be stressed that this relates to selling knives, not possessing them. Essentially, it means that if there's an adult present to make the actual purchase, all is well. It doesn't mean that a 16-year old then cannot carry one of those table knives -- or any other knife, for that matter -- around to use it in perfectly acceptable ways. (There may, of course, be other laws that address that.) -- Captain Disdain (talk) 10:49, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Although the law sounds a little nannyistic, it's reasonable to ask why someone under 18 (and presumably living at home) needs to buy a knife. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 12:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * In the UK it is legal for a 16 year old to marry and set up home away from one's parents. I've not seen any case law on how this is affected by knife crime legislation! --TammyMoet (talk) 13:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 16? All the more reason to keep knives out of their hands! Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 13:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You also have to be 18 in the UK to buy plastic cutlery. I assume this is to do with the knives in the packet. When recently purchasing some, it came up with that message on the register that asks if the customer is 18. Personally I think that is ridiculous.195.49.180.146 (talk) 13:59, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Legal status of public sex
What is legal status of public sex in the United States, in Canada and in the United Kingdom? Is there any European country which explicitly ban public sex and is there any European country which explicitly recognizes public sex as a civil right? And what is the legal status of public display of BDSM practices in the United States? --AquaticMonkey (talk) 07:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * In England and Wales, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 states the following:
 * 66 Exposure
 * (1) A person commits an offence if—
 * (a) he intentionally exposes his genitals, and
 * (b) he intends that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress.
 * and
 * 71 Sexual activity in a public lavatory
 * (1) A person commits an offence if—
 * (a) he is in a lavatory to which the public or a section of the public has or is permitted to have access, whether on payment or otherwise,
 * (b) he intentionally engages in an activity, and,
 * (c) the activity is sexual.
 * (2) For the purposes of this section, an activity is sexual if a reasonable person would, in all the circumstances but regardless of any person’s purpose, consider it to be sexual.
 * . AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 08:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Having said all that, in the UK, sex in any public place is an offence, whether it is intended to be seen or not, and the offender(s) are placed on the Sex Offender's Register for a certain length of time, at the discretion of the judge presiding. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 11:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The United States and Canada are federal countries, and usually these laws are handled on a state-by-state or province-by-province manner. In many U.S. states there are laws against things like "Public indecency" or "Obscenity" or "Indecent exposure" or possibly more broadly "Sex crime"  Each of those articles covers the U.S. and in some cases Canada and the U.K.  -- Jayron  32  12:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Don't assume. Criminal law in Canada is federal.  A copy of the Criminal Code that I downloaded earlier this year says:


 * Indecent acts
 * 173. (1) Every one who wilfully does an indecent act
 * (a) in a public place in the presence of one or more persons, or
 * (b) in any place, with intent thereby to insult or offend any person, is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
 * Exposure
 * (2) Every person who, in any place, for a sexual purpose, exposes his or her genital organs to a person who is under the age of 16 years is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
 * Nudity
 * 174. (1) Every one who, without lawful excuse,
 * (a) is nude in a public place, or
 * (b) is nude and exposed to public view while on private property, whether or not the property is his own, is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
 * Nude
 * (2) For the purposes of this section, a person is nude who is so clad as to offend against public decency or order.
 * Consent of Attorney General
 * (3) No proceedings shall be commenced under this section without the consent of the Attorney General.


 * The terms "indecent" and "public decency" are not defined in the Criminal Code, so they encompass whatever actions the courts say they do. (I hate it when legislators do that.)  There are also provisions in the Criminal Code against "indecent exhibitions", "indecent or obscene performances", etc., which I take to refer to exhibitions of pornography on the one hand and stage shows on the other, so I won't quote them here.  --Anonymous, 18:17 UTC, August 28, 20009.


 * I think in the UK the law says something like "sexual activity when there is a significant likelihood of someone seeing it" is illegal. There is no need for anyone to actually see it (you could be caught of CCTV, for example). --Tango (talk) 14:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * If the supposedly public space is in fact an enclosed area, do not discount the legal dangers of smoking: you could be prosecuted, as this couple was. BrainyBabe (talk) 17:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Not quite what you were asking but... The US state of Vermont doesn't have any laws against nudity in public.  It is left up to towns.  See this for a semi-recent news story about public nudity here. There are some beaches around the state where the public is notified that there are no public nudity laws.  Dismas |(talk) 02:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Toplessness is permitted in Ontario as long as it's not commercial. The thing is what is sexual of offensive? What about petting, fondling of "secondary sexual" body parts, or in one case I heard of, "shrimping"?68.179.108.25 (talk) 00:21, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Unusual looking "hats" in pic
Image:Grand_Rabbi_Aaron_Teitelbaum,_Satmar_Rebbe,_in_synagogue,_on_Hanukkah,_in_Kiryas_Joel,_New_York_State.jpg shows, in the bottom of the image, people standing, however, only what's on their heads can be seen. My question is, what are they? They look like large cylindrical fur hats. Is there a specific name for them? 76.117.247.55 (talk) 07:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a shtreimel. — Kpalion(talk) 08:12, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Most important battle in history
Which land or sea battle would have have made the biggest change in European or Western history if it had been lost instead of won, or vice versa? The Battle of Trafalgar, for example, would I understand have led to Napolean invading Britain if it had been lost. Similarly with the Battle Of Britain. I suppose the longer ago the battle, the bigger the change in history since then. 78.144.194.80 (talk) 09:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * You're on slightly dodgy - though fascinating - ground. Counterfactual history is somewhat speculative, as, equally, are assessments of the importance of particular battles. Would Napoleon or Hitler actually have invaded Britain? Would there merely have been a next battle - the battle of Dover, which would now take the Battle of Britain's place in the pantheon? --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The Battle of Tours is often mentioned around questions like this; there's a brief discussion in the article's introduction. Jørgen (talk) 10:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I would put a penny in for D-Day. If that hadn't worked, the war would have gone on and on, probably until the Russians had taken France after they (theoretically speaking) had taken Germany. What a very weird Cold War that would have been. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 11:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * To be exact, it would have gone on and on until August 1945, when the first atomic bomb was dropped on Germany. After that, who can say?  --Anon, 18:22 UTC, August 28, 2009.
 * That assumes the Manhattan Project would have gone ahead as planned in that instance. Politics is a funny thing. &mdash;  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 17:18, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * There's plenty of such battles put forward (see Battles of macrohistorical importance involving invasions of Europe for some of the more popular ones). But, given that the further back you go the greater the changes will be, my vote would go to a lost Battle of Salamis: no Athenian Golden Age, no western world (as we understand it) at all. Conversely, for lost battles that could have been won, Adrianople and Yarmouk would be strong contenders: the first broke the Roman army for good and heralded the triumph of the Germanic peoples in Western Europe, the second was decisive in facilitating the spread of Islam and the final collapse of late Antiquity. Constantine  ✍  11:32, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The classic listing is The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World -- but that was somewhat selective, and of course there has been 150 years of history since then... AnonMoos (talk) 14:20, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

''The reference desk does not answer requests for opinions .... Do not start a debate; please seek an internet forum instead.'' (see top of page).83.100.250.79 (talk) 12:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see any debating here, just offering up constructive facts as possible (though obviously conjectural) answers. --68.50.54.144 (talk) 13:19, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Stalingrad --pma (talk) 14:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * To avoid the complaint of 83.100.250.79, answers can be cited to military historians or national war colleges. Perfectly legitimate thread. Edison (talk) 15:26, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Battle of Warsaw (1920). Is it OK if I quote Clio the Muse? ''"... I would have to say that there is, for me, only one truly decisive battle in all of the twentieth century, and that was the Miracle on the Vistula in 1920. It was the key encounter of the Polish-Soviet War, one where the brilliant Józef Piłsudski stopped the westward drive of Mikhail Tukhachevski and the Soviet Army.  Just consider the likely outcome if the Poles had been defeated.  Their country would have been transformed into a satellite of Communist Russia.  But far more serious than that the Russians would have been able to carry their revolution forward into a weakened and divided Germany,  and possibly even beyond, as Lenin eagerly anticipated.  As it was the Soviet experiment was thrown back on itself, to Socialism in One Country, to the eventual eclipse of Trotsky and the steady ascent of Stalin.

Is there anything more monumental than that?"'' — Kpalion(talk) 16:22, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Allow me to note that while this user was one of the more brilliant in the history of the Reference Desk, she clearly self-identified as conservative and a "bluestocking"; to me, the arguments for the monumentality of this battle seem very influenced by a vivid fear of Communist Russia - far more so than KageTora's argument above (though I disagree quite a bit with that as well...). But no discussions, right. Sorry. Jørgen (talk) 16:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm too quite surprised folks. Wouldn't have been the change big enough, had Hitler won at Stalingrad? Just try to imagine, if the idea is not too repulsive. The importance of this battle is quite evident from the number of casualties --the highest of all history. In medieval times there used to happen evening battles between Pisa and Lucca, that usually were stopped at dinner time; but this is another story. Definitely, the most important battle of all history. That said, I start understanding what 83.100 meant. Sorry... --pma (talk) 17:20, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced by Stalingrad. It was certainly one of the biggest battles ever (though if you include counter-offensives, Kursk was larger in most measures) but the impact is questionable. By the time of Stalingrad the Red Army was strong enough to survive a defeat, and the Soviet Union would likely have survived the loss of the city. Now if Moscow had fallen in Winter 1941 then perhaps the course of the war would have been changed. Personally I would go for the battle of Metaurus. Had Hasdrubal won then Rome would likely (or at least possibly) have fallend, Carthage would have ruled and Islam may be the dominant religion in Europe even today. Now that's big. Prokhorovka (talk) 20:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Poul Anderson's Delenda Est explores the Carthage-triumphing-over-Rome scenario -- but without Islam, since the origin of Islam was in significant part stimulated by or a reaction to Christianity. AnonMoos (talk) 00:30, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There's another 800 years between Metaurus and the rise of Islam, and without the Roman Empire in the picture I would think it's impossible to predict what would have happened in Arabia. Maybe the rise of Carthage would have emboldened the Phoenician religion back home. We'd all be baby-eating polytheists! Adam Bishop (talk) 21:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What, Jon & Kate Plus 8 doesn't count as baby-eating? Clarityfiend (talk) 23:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Had Carthage won, the Hellenistic states would possibly have survived to the Roman expansion in the Mediterranean sea. To be optimistic: no Judaic religions around; no Middle Age; no 1500 years interruption in the developpement of science and technology... --pma (talk) 07:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh boo - not that nonsense again. I'll just assume you know that's bull so I don't have to get into another argument :) Adam Bishop (talk) 02:28, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way, Tagishsimon: RMA Sandhurst did a series of wargames in 1974 (or 1979, I can't remember) where they presumed the British lost the Battle of Britain, but the RAF was still a viable if weak fighting force and Hitler launches Operation Sealion. In every attempt the British won by moving the Royal Navy from Scapa Flow into the Channel, halting the German forces eventually at a stop line below London and thus leaving a German force without reinforcement and lacking strength to overcome all of the regular British army, even in its weakened state. See Operation_Sealion Prokhorovka (talk) 20:59, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * thanks - interesting reading --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

how similar are japanese culture and korean culture?
--59.189.63.81 (talk) 13:59, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Both have been heavily influenced by China in the past, and Korea was the main channel through which Chinese writing, Buddhism etc. were originally transmitted to Japan. However, the countries have been shaped by being in different geographical locations, undergoing different historical experiences, speaking different languages, etc. AnonMoos (talk) 14:14, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * You may care to compare and contrast Culture of Korea and Culture of Japan. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 05:42, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

The modern architecture is pretty much the same, though the traditional architecture has many differences, not least that Korean temples tend to be more colourful (I am not comparing with the major temples of Japan, like Kiyomizu Temple, Ginkakuji, and Kinkakuji - I mean the smaller, local ones). The pavements, interestingly enough, are identical, as are the sides of the road that drain the water off. The stations also have the exact same yellow lines with alternating bumps and lines for the vision-impaired. Just an observation. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 05:39, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, the vision-impaired lines are common in Hong Kong, too. DOR (HK) (talk) 08:22, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And in Australia. I don't think it should be regarded as an aspect of the traditional cultures of those countries. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:36, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Captured US soldiers during the Iraq War 2003
What happened with the US soldiers captured by the iraqi Army during the Iraq War 2003? For example this soldier that was shown on Al Djazira in March 2003? 14:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.199.34.108 (talk)


 * You might want to take a look at our article American P.O.W.s in 2003 Invasion of Iraq. Marco polo (talk) 17:51, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Is there one on British P.O.W.s in 2003 Invasion of Iraq? --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 13:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Evidently not :( --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 13:55, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Sociology of wiki
Are there sociologic studies on the population of Wikipedia, in particular on the RefDesk communities? Even if I suspect that if there is any, they won't let us know that we are under study.--pma (talk) 14:17, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * For studies to be of much worth, I would expect the need for the researchers to gather data on the Wikipedians by asking them for at least demographic info (age, geographic location, socioeconomic status, level of education, family information. Some Wikipedians have been asked to be the subjects of studies, but there may be a selection bias in who agrees to give up data which might make their anonymity disappear if the researcher were careless. It should be possible to get hundreds to volunteer if thousands were asked. Edison (talk) 15:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Several studies to some degree along these lines have been mentioned in past issues of the Wikipedia Signpost... AnonMoos (talk) 17:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--pma (talk) 07:29, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * There are tons and tons of academic studies of Wikipedia at this point, including demographics, usage patterns, editing patterns, etc. It's a very hot topic in many fields. --68.50.54.144 (talk) 11:44, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

The Mounties always get their man . ..
This is a popular piece of folklore here in Canada. However, in comparison to other police agencies (both domestic and abroad, provincial, state, federal, etc.) how does the Royal Canadian Mounted Police measure up re: solving cases and "getting their man?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.77.185.91 (talk) 15:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if there are statistics for that sort of thing, but the Mounties are often also the provincial police in Canada. Lately I think they have an image of bumbling, corrupt, arrogant fools, with the various scandals they have been involved in during the past few years. The folklore is mostly an image of the 19th century, Sam Steele and all that, or of the Musical Ride. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:04, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The Mounties have been going downhill ever since Dudley Do-Right retired. :( Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 21:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * See Scandals surrounding the RCMP. They always get their man (maybe not the right one, but they get him). Clarityfiend (talk) 21:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What they're missing is a good, catchy theme song. For one possible candidate, go to this clip and start at about the 4:50 mark. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 09:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Western dress code in Ottoman Balkan?
This question is about the western countries in Balkan under the Turkish Muslim Ottoman rule, such as present day Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia and Greece. I wonder: did the non-muslims of these countries have to follow Muslim dress code, or did they dress in Western fashion? Did, for example, the Christian Romanian women in the 18th-century wear veils, or French fashion? --85.226.45.10 (talk) 22:51, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Probably neither, but their local costume or "national costume"... AnonMoos (talk) 00:15, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

If you look at portraits of Romanian people of the 18th-century, such as this: [], it seems they dressed in Western-European fashion. But of course, that is a person from the nobility, and also an emigrant. I assume that the public in these countries dressed in their local costume. The question is rather how the nobility dressed. Its an interesting question. This may be different depending on the country: one can image that the situation was different in Romania than in Bulgaria, for example. It is a question about following countries, I think:


 * Romania


 * Bulgaria


 * Serbia


 * Greece

A guess would be that also the nobility kept national costume in the 17th-century, but how was the situation in the 18th-century? Another guess that Romania, and also Greece, were Alexandra Mavrokordatou introduced the Salon in the 17th-century, was more Western influenced than Serbia and Bulgaria. But that's only guesses. Perhaps someone knows? --Aciram (talk) 10:30, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I am from Bosnia and Herzegovina, which has (and had) Muslims, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic population during the Ottoman era. I remember reading that all the women covered their head (covering heads was and somewhere still remains a Christian tradition too), but in a different manner: Muslim women covered all their hair, while Christian women covered only half of their head. Muslim women wore dresses in different colours, while the Roman Catholic women wore black dresses and the Orthodox women wore royal blue dresses. The men's headwear was also different. There was no Western fashion in Bosnia and Herezgovina until Austria-Hungary took over. Surtsicna (talk) 19:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

The first theatre and actors in Estonia
What was the first theatre in Estonia with professional actors of both genders? Who is counted as the first professional actor and actress respectively? Thank you in advance for those who can answer! --Aciram (talk) 22:44, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The net seem to claim that the first professional theatre was a German founded in Tallinn in 1809. [] Is this correct? What was it called? The question about the actors is harder. Does anyone know the names of the first actor and actress, or at least the first well known ones? Feel free to answer on my talk page. I would be grateful. Regards--Aciram (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

The first Bulgarian theatre
What was the first theatre in this country with professional actors of both genders? Who is counted as the first professional actor and actress respectively? Thank you in advance for those who can answer!--Aciram (talk) 22:55, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The net seem to claim that the first professional theatre was founded in 1883. Is this correct? The question about the actors is harder. Does anyone know the names of the first actor and actress, or at least the first well known ones? Feel free to answer on my talk page. I would be grateful. Regards --Aciram (talk) 14:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Romania's first theatre and actors
What was the first theatre in this country with professional actors of both genders? Who is counted as the first professional actor and actress respectively? Thank you in advance for those who can answer!--Aciram (talk) 22:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The net seem to claim that the first professional theatre was a German Theatre in Sibiu 1788, and a theatre/opera in Bucharest in 1833. [] []Is this correct? The question about the actors is harder. Does anyone know the names of the first actor and actress, or at least the first well known ones? Feel free to answer on my talk page. I would be grateful. Regards --Aciram (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

The first theatre and actors in Hungary
What was the first theatre in this country with professional actors of both genders? Who is counted as the first professional actor and actress respectively? Thank you in advance for those who can answer!--Aciram (talk) 23:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The net seem to claim that the first professional theatre was a German theatre in Budapest in 1760, and Hungarian a theatre in Cluj in 1792. Is this correct? The question about the actors is harder. Does anyone know the names of the first actor and actress, or at least the first well known ones? Feel free to answer on my talk page. I would be grateful. Regards --Aciram (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Have you considered posting a question on the Hungarian Wikipedia? Either on their refdesk, or on a theatre talkpage? If you do so in polite English ("I'm very sorry I don't speak Hungarian") you might get some answers. Or you could ask our Language Desk to translate the question, and worry about the answer when you get it. BrainyBabe (talk) 08:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've posted a note at the Hungarian refdesk, using an online translator and a notice of "Please forgive the horrid language, as I've had to use an online translator; if you read English, what I actually wrote is visible." Nyttend (talk) 03:36, 4 September 2009 (UTC)