Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 October 3

= October 3 =

Art and money
1) Works by Van Gogh for example have risen in price. But are there many instances of works of art that have significantly declined in price - where their valuation in the past was greater than it is now? 2) How do economists explain the art market? Particularly for modern art, where you could sometimes buy identical items for a tiny fraction of the price (Damien Hurst's Pharmacy for example, that urinal thing)? 78.151.117.222 (talk) 01:09, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * There is an artist (I have absolutely no clue who it was) who was well regarded. He painted very realistic paintings.  They were worth a reasonable amount of money.  Then, long after he died, it was discovered that he couldn't draw very well.  He used an overhead projector to project photos on his canvas.  He traced them and then painted them.  When this was discovered, the value of his works fell.  They are still considered very nice works of art, but not completely original.  Perhaps someone reading this will know exactly who it was and be able to point out the old and current value of his paintings.  The only one I remember in the documentary that I saw was one of a boy sitting on a dock. -- k a i n a w &trade; 02:01, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Was it an overhead projector, or was it a camera obscura? →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 06:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Johannes Vermeer was suspected of using a camera obscura in his work, but as far as I know his works are considered priceless. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 06:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I see the similarity, but the documentary I saw showed the overhead projector and the transparencies he used in his painting room. They were able to reassemble his most popular works by using the transparencies. -- k a i n a w &trade; 13:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * In I900, you could have bought all of Van Gogh's paintings for the price of just one by Alma-Tadema. In 1960, you could buy all of Alma-Tadema's paintings for the price of just one by Van Gogh. The market of reputation and of money in art has its dizzying ups and downs.Rhinoracer (talk) 12:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * And there are many examples of unrecognised masterpieces being found in someone's dusty attic and being sold for a paltry sum, but when the real artist is identified, the current owner discovers they're an instant millionaire, assuming they choose to now re-sell the painting for its actual market price. --  JackofOz (talk) 22:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * An economist would tell you that price is determined by supply and demand. In this case a decrease in demand. There are many "economics reasons" demand might fall and in this case an economist would likely say it was due to a change in consumer preferences. The supply and demand model isn't broken just because people want something less.203.214.104.166 (talk) 13:11, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In the case of Damien Hirst or Marcel Duchamp's urinal, the fact that you could buy something the same or similar for far less money is neither here nor there. What gives the art its value is the fact that that particular artist made the piece. Anything else tends towards the philistine (the "that's not art, anyone could do that" point of view). --Richardrj talkemail 13:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * But it is not the art that is fickle, or the art market. It is the viewer who is fallible. Here is an example not from art, but from music. Bus stop (talk) 13:01, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Murder in a gay couple.
Hi; in my country, Argentina, murdering a relative carries a mandatory life sentence. Example: Carlos Carrascosa was convicted last June of murdering his wife María Marta García Belsunce in Pilar, Buenos Aires Province and was sentenced to a mandatory prisión perpetua (life imprisonment). My question is, if in a gay couple, one of them kill the another one, would the crime carry a mandatory life sentence if gay partnership is not recognized?. Hope you understand me. Thank you ! --FromSouthAmerica (talk) 02:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Does marital status really affect the sentence? It doesn't matter if Carrascosa murdered his wife, it only matters that he murdered someone. Same for a gay couple. (Unless the law is different in Argentina, which is possible.) Adam Bishop (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * According to the OP and Life imprisonment, murdering a relative indeed makes a difference. How 'relative' is defined however I haven't been able to find Nil Einne (talk) 11:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I suspect that in a country which doesn't acknowledge gay partnerships, a man who murdered his husband would not be tried under that law. However, he would also be subject to the contempt that such countries often have for homosexuals and treated as such (equally badly or worse than if he had murdered a wife). 130.56.65.25 (talk) 03:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Is there a word for Oriental/Asian/Mongoloid that is politically correct, accurate, and non-offensive?
Is there a word for Oriental/Asian/Mongoloid that is politically correct, accurate, and non-offensive?


 * Oriental -- is a word that sounds pleasant and complimentary, but some whiny politically correct nuts turned it into being politcally incorrect
 * Asian -- the worst politically correct term out there because of its inaccuracy. Most of Asia is caucasian, middle eastern, and indo-arayan.  And the Oriental/Mongoloid race category is mostly not on the continent of Asia, but on islands near Asia.
 * Mongoloid -- scientific, possibly poltically correct, but the term is very offensive

And telling which country a people came from or their sub race like Han or Maio is usually too difficult. So... is there a word for Oriental/Asian/Mongoloid that is politically correct, accurate, and non-offensive? Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 05:05, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Race is pretty much a bullshit idea, in the sense that there is usually very little scientific backing or great consistancy in classifying people. Terms like Han or Maio don't refer to subraces, they refer to people groups, and are self-identifying tags used by the groups themselves.  If you want to refer to someone, use terms they would use to describe themselves to others.  That is universally the most accurate and non-offensive way to talk about someone.  -- Jayron  32  05:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "Asian" has become the euphemism for "Oriental", meaning Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and most anyone else east or northeast of the Himalayas and residing along the western Pacific rim. "Oriental" means "Eastern", and it's more precise than "Asian" for sure, but that's the nature of political correctness. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 06:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "Asian" has that connotation (of Northeast Asian and/or Southeast Asian, although oddly enough not always of Filipino) in the U.S. today, but in other places, such as Britain and Africa, it's far more likely to imply South Asian (from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and surrounding countries). But as more South Asians migrate to the U.S. (and have children), and more East Asians migrate to Europe and Africa (and have children), those assumptions may well change. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's interesting, and by your implication it has to do with the type of immigrants seen in a given area. To be more blunt, "Asian" as a euphemism for "Oriental", in the U.S.A., refers to those of the "Mongoloid" race grouping, i.e. those with what some call "almond eyes". Filipinos don't really have that characteristic, nor do Indians, Pakistanis, etc. Hence, in America, "Asian" is a rather specific (and misleading) racial euphemism. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 07:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In British English, the term "Asian" (i.e. British Asian) excludes all but those from the former British India. BrainyBabe (talk) 08:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * As noted by Shakescene also, the British usage seems to be opposite from the American usage. So there may be no correct answer to OP unless he specifies where he's from. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 08:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd use East Asian. Accurate, and no-one's taken offence to it, although of course no term is without problems. That is, if you meant China(s)/Koreas/Japan sort-of-thing, rather than all of Asia. In Britain, Asian did mean British Indian, now it's changing to mean both them and the above group. - Jarry1250 [ In the UK? Sign the petition! ] 09:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with "East Asian," "South Asian," "Southeast Asian," "Central Asian," etc. Specific regional descriptions are unambiguous without bringing up any racial implications that tend to cause problems (rightly or wrongly). Rckrone (talk) 17:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think you can say they're entirely unambiguous. For example are Afghanis, South Asians or Central Asians? Vietnam is in South East Asia geographically and politically but often considered culturally East Asian. I suspect many people would identify Baichung Bhutia as East Asian if they look at him but as an Indian he's surely South Asian right? I'm part Chinese Malaysian and part Pākehā; so consider myself both East Asian and South East Asian. And in that vein, how do we deal with Singapore? It has a significant what many would call East Asian cultural influence given the Chinese dominance but also some South East Asian and of course South Asian cultural influence but is well and truly part of South East Asia and doesn't even neighbour part of East Asia. Any attempt to categorise humans is always going to have problems particular at the borderlines. P.S. As should be obvious, I do consider the terms the best solution but I think people should appreciate that they're far from unambigious. P.P.S. I should point out as hinted at by Jayron32, Mongloid often isn't considered particularly scientific nowadays Nil Einne (talk) 09:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

In the Mongoloid article I noticed they say "an historical" in the first sentence. Is this correct grammar? I've seen it used a lot but I don't think it is. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 08:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * See this recent discussion of "an heroic achievement", "an historic occasion", etc. at the Language Reference Desk: Reference desk/Archives/Language/2009 September 30 —— Shakescene (talk) 07:23, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

If the OP is happy to use African to describe everyone from Afrikaans to Zulus, then South Asian and East Asian would be much more precise descriptions of the people living between the Western Pacific and the Arabian Peninsula. But, it might be more useful to try and understand the differences between Japanese and Burmans. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Left-wing unionism
Are/Were there any left-wing or socialist Unionist organisations or groups in Ireland and Northern Ireland? --05:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You're referring, I presume, to Unionism in the sense of wishing to preserve or strengthen Northern Ireland's political bond with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and opposing independence or absorption into the Irish Republic, rather than in the sense of trade unionism or labour unionism. I think that there was a strong working-class flavour to the Popular Unionist Party, which adopted a social programme broader than simple Ulster Unionism. (Many of the militias that supported other small Unionist parties, such as the Ulster Democratic Party, also had working-class roots, but I don't think that their political agendas were particularly left-wing.) The Northern Ireland Labour Party tries to avoid the question of political union with either the UK or the Republic (unlike the explicitly-nationalist Social Democratic and Labour Party), and I think includes many members who are both Ulster Unionists and trade-unionists.


 * If you're asking more about left-wing unionism in the spirit of James Connolly, there are still several left-wing groups that are either nationalist or internationalist, such as the Workers' Party of Ireland, the Socialist Workers Party and the Communist Party of Ireland.


 * But I've never set foot in Ireland, so these are strictly third- and fourth-hand observations and speculations; there must be others here who know far more and far better than I. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * There used to be a bit of a joke about even the poorest unionist considering themselves middle class to distinguish themselves from the nationalists. Probably breaking up a bit now. Dmcq (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * There was a controversy a few year back, when one of the Irish trotskyist parties (SWP?) began re-evaluating the PUP, saying that PUP was more working-class-oriented than other parties in NI politics, etc.. This caused quite a stir as the Irish left is historically pro-republican in one sense or another. --Soman (talk) 16:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The PUP is the obvious example. The Northern Ireland Labour Party dissolved more than twenty years ago; it long attempted to be neutral but ultimately adopted unionist positions.  Other historic examples include the vaguely leftish Ulster Progressive Unionist Association, the Commonwealth Labour Party (a split from the NILP).  The UK Unionist Party initially supported the British Labour Party, but soon became highly critical of it.  There have been individuals in both the Ulster Unionist Party and Democratic Unionist Party who have been described as left-wing, but I'd argue that they weren't very left-wing, and seldom had any influence.  The most left-wing unionist group would be the small British and Irish Communist Organisation, although their position shifted somewhat over the years. Warofdreams talk 00:03, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Brit honors
It seems to this American that there are a lot of Brits who are honored by the royals (CBE, OBE, etc). So, from a layman on the street perspective, are these titles given much attention? Do they make the nightly news over there? Are only the more prestigous ones paid any sort of attention? Dismas |(talk) 09:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Our article on orders, decorations, and medals of the United Kingdom ought to give you some idea. And by the way, it's British, not Brit. Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * British is an adjective, Brit is a noun. "British" would seem more grammatically correct here. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:32, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, see this entry. Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I would think it's easier to take insults when you're a top dog, running an empire. :) →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I always thought "Brit" was short for "Britisher", but the article says that's obsolete. But speaking of taking insults, what do the British call us Yanks? →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not really about an "insult", as such, just an unnecessary lack of respect. One of the comments on the blog Separated by a Common Language pretty much sums it up:
 * ''Whoever coined Brit clearly had some idea of how they should have been referring to me - it is clearly a shortened or diminutive form of Britain, British, Briton - and the speaker couldn’t be bothered to say the whole word/phrase. That ‘can’t be bothered’ translates as a lack of respect. That lack of respect irritates me. :~)
 * ''On a personal level, I never meant any great insult by calling Americans, Yanks - but I stopped doing it when I realised that many Americans did find it irritating. And that irritates me slightly as well. I was prepared to change my word usage to avoid irritating/annoying Americans - why aren’t they prepared to moderate their word usage to stop irritating me?
 * ''I understand that it is a minor thing and that I shouldn’t be so sensitive …….
 * ''However, I was taught that to insult someone accidentally was just plain bad manners. Good communication is all about choosing words that your listener will interpret in the same way as you intend them. When speaking, it is my job to understand how my words will be understood and to choose them carefully. Therefore, if I insult someone accidentally, I have failed to communicate well.
 * ''Insulting people on purpose is a whole different ball game. :~)
 * Reuben Said “As a Yank living in the UK, I find it shocking that people find 'Brit' anything other than neutral.” - Well I find it absolutely shocking that anyone who reads blogs like these doesn’t realise that there are huge differences in the way that language is perceived by different people. I just hope that Reuben was trying to be ironic – no matter how badly he pulled it off. Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "Yank" is neither an insult nor disrespectful. It's just a nickname. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ironically, "Reuben" is a semi-polite way of saying "Rube" or "Hick" or "Country Bumpkin" or "Hayseed" or "Jay" (old-fashioned term). Or is that the point? →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's just a reference to one of the earlier comments on the blog that I was quoting from. Meanwhile, our article on Yankee says Outside the United States, Yank or Yankee is a slang term, sometimes but not always derogatory, for any U.S. citizen, and indicates that many Southerners would certainly not regard it as a neutral term. Malcolm XIV (talk) 11:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The blog wouldn't come up, so I don't know their context of "Reuben". There's no question people outside the USA use "Yankee" as an insult, and always have. We just don't care. We've embraced the term and worn it like a badge of honor. Most of the time, anyway. The Yankee article has an amusing summary of how the term is used with successive groups to describe someone else. The New York Yankees got their name because it's a synonym of "American". Songs like "Yankee Doodle" and "The Yankee Doodle Boy" are considered patriotic. Although there is the old southern joke, about the guy who said he was 21 years old before he realized that "damn" and "yankee" were separate words. :) →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 11:09, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The "context" of Reuben is that it is the name of a commenter on the blog. That is all. Malcolm XIV (talk) 11:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It still won't come up. I just wondered if they were trying to imply that only a "Rube" would call a British person a "Brit". →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 11:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * If you're all done talking about slang terms for populations... this mongrel half-kraut yank's question is still unanswered.  Dismas |(talk) 12:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There are generally two batches of honours awarded each year, in the Queen's birthday honours list and the New Year honours list, which are reported about in the news, yes. But it's pretty rare to see things like OBE appended to people's names in general practice, particularly given than many of those who receive the honours are unknown civil servants. People like Jimmy Saville might insist on it, though... Malcolm XIV (talk) 12:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My sense is that people are much more attached to/conscious of knighthoods than to/of the other honours. Even peerages have become somewhat debased of recent years.  The ordinary person would be generally aware that the former Mr Smith is now Sir Murgatroyd Smith; but they wouldn't know, or really care, that Mr Jones is a CBE, OM, LVO or CH. --  JackofOz (talk) 14:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * As an example of what Jack said, observe that Sir Alan is a redirect for Alan Sugar. Malcolm XIV (talk) 14:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * As another example closer to home, I've lost count of the number of WP articles I've edited that said the subject "was awarded the Order of the British Empire/Order of Australia" or whatever. Such awards - or appointments, to give the correct term - are to a particular level of the relevant order, such as Member, Officer, Commander, Companion, etc.  Nobody is ever awarded "the Order of the British Empire" as such.  But common parlance would have it otherwise, because the vast majority of people are indifferent to/ignorant of the forms and customs they use, because they don't have a particular interest in these things, mainly because they know there's precious little chance of them ever getting one.  --  JackofOz (talk) 14:55, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The lower level honours (like MBEs) are handed out in quite large numbers, only those going to famous people get any real mention in the press. Local newspapers might mention local people being honoured, though. Someone being honoured for something particularly interesting might get mentioned in an "And finally..." type story. OBEs and CBEs are rather more prestigious, but still only really get press attention when going to famous people. Knighthoods are given routinely to people with certain jobs - High Court judges, senior civil servants, etc., nobody pays any attention to those. Knighthoods for less routine reasons get more attention, but I think usually you have to be either very rich or very famous to get one anyway. Peerages are mostly handed out for political reasons, so nobody pays much attention to them (one exception is peerages handed out as part of the "Government of all the Talent" (GOAT) where experts in their field, sometimes famous ones, are given peerages so they can take government positions, as recently happened with the now Lord Alan). --Tango (talk) 17:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Speaking as a French-American who lived for years in London and has worked with Britons for three decades, I must say that I have never met one who objected to the word `Brit`, and, indeed, many use it themselves. You Limeys, Taffies and Jocks are way too sensitive. Rhinoracer (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Just because some people don't mind it, doesn't mean nobody does. And just because nobody voiced an objection, it doesn't mean it didn't grate with them. It's not about anyone being oversensitive, it's about respect: not playing the Ugly American. Malcolm XIV (talk) 12:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Instead of just claiming that the word brit is a no-no, would you please then suggest a replacement. Saying British persons, UK citizens, or whatever doesn't seem to cut it. It is quite interesting that the convenient names in English used for other peoples e.g. Swedes, Danes, Dutch are widely accepted and used but that extra PC-talk is necessary for yourselves. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 12:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's really not "PC talk" to ask people not to use unwanted diminutives. If you kept called me "Malc" in a faux-chummy way, I would be quite within my rights to ask you to stop without it being anything to do with political correctness. Your use of Swedes, Danes and Dutch conveniently overlooks other proximate nations that have an equivalent "problem" with terminology. Are you saying it's too much bother to say "French people" or "Irish citizens", for example? Or is there a "convenient" name for them that I haven't yet heard?
 * In the case of this question, I was assuming in good faith that the OP didn't realise that his choice of words might irritate some people. Some people, not all people. I don't really think it would have been all that "inconvenient" to say British honors or a lot of British people. Malcolm XIV (talk) 13:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I guess I shouldn't have mentioned PC, since it apparently gave you the opportunity to answer but avoid the actual question. I'll re-state it: In a sentence such as "It seems to this American that there are a lot of X who are honored by the royals...", where X refers to persons from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, what is the appropriate X? You have made it clear that you consider brits unacceptable. What do you want us to use to avoid the "unnecessary lack of respect"? /Coffeeshivers (talk) 16:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If you re-read what I said, I gave alternatives in my final sentence. Malcolm XIV (talk) 16:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * MBE sounds something like being made a Kentucky colonel by the Governor of that state, like Col. Sanders of chicken fame, Pope John Paul II, or Winston Churchill, who were all thereby entitled to be called the equivalent of "Colonel Winston Churchill" or "Honorable Pope John Paul II" or whatever. Edison (talk) 18:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * In recent years these honours have to my mind been given to unsuitable people with immoral pasts, so they are just baubles that the royals give away to buy popularity rather than being a mark of true worth. 89.242.93.56 (talk) 13:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The Queen only makes the decisions for giving honours to other royals. The Prime Minister decides who else should get honours (on the advice of various committees and things). --Tango (talk) 20:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The thought of Winston Churchill or Pope John Paul II being made Kentucky Colonels is an amusing mental picture. Back to the "Brits" thing for a second, a Britisher on another ref desk page called himself a "Brit". Is it the case that it's OK for them to call themselves that, but not for others to? →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots


 * Except, Tango, that there are certain honours within the monarch's personal gift, such as the Royal Victorian Order, the Order of the Garter and the Order of the Thistle. She and she alone decides who gets these, and when, and why; the only limitation is that there can be at most 24 Knights of the Garter alive at any one time, and only 16 Knights of the Thistle.  --  JackofOz (talk) 07:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * True, but those are almost exclusively handed out to royals, other aristocrats and people known personally to the monarch. They aren't handed to the public for good deeds. --Tango (talk) 03:17, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * True. But they could be.  It's entirely up to the Queen who gets them.  There are certainly people who've never met the Queen but have been given the lower categories of the RVO (Lieutenant, Member, Medal) for some sort of service to her in far-flung places. --  JackofOz (talk) 20:36, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "Could" is a difficult word in the UK - while there is nothing in writing that stops the Queen doing pretty much whatever she wants, conventionally there are lots of restrictions and here, convention is law. --Tango (talk) 20:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering if we're talking at cross purposes. If the government, or whatever body decides these things, recommended in its wisdom that some horrible dictator should get a knighthood in the Order of the British Empire or the Order of the Bath, the Queen would be virtually powerless to prevent it (it happened with Robert Mugabe, for example; then his honour was stripped from him; I'd never be surprised to learn the Queen had serious reservations about the award in the first place but could not intervene).  But for the orders within her personal gift, she does have the power to say yea or nay.  That's the whole point of "personal gift".  I'm sure the government recommends some of these awards as well; I can't imagine the Queen personally singles out all the recipients of the lower categories.  But at the end of the day, if she does not want such an honour to proceed, it doesn't.  --  JackofOz (talk) 08:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

To shed more light on the original question, it may be of use to note that the honours are given out twice a year, at New Year and on the Queen's "birthday". So newspapers cover them on those occasions. Some newspapers print the entire list and then you have to peer through it for any names you recognise or search for the surnames of your hero(in)es, work colleagues or whoever. Knighthoods, especially to celebrities, make the TV news (still hard to believe in "Sir" Mick Jagger). Local papers carry the news of who locally has an honour. The specialist press usually says something about people in their own line of work, for example, the Times Educational Supplement prints the list of all those who have received an honour for their work in education. After noting anything we're interested in, we then forget about it. Itsmejudith (talk) 13:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Royals of Multiple birth
Has there been any royal person in history that were twins, triplets, quadruplets, or quintuplet? --Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Princess Sara and Princess Aisha of Jordan are twins. There's also Romulus and Remus, though they are of somewhat dubious historicity. Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I remember that William IV of England had a pair of twin sons by his consort Adelaide, but they were stillborn. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) &bull; 11:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And Prince Frederick Charles of Hesse sired two sets of twins: Philipp, Landgrave of Hesse and Prince Wolfgang of Hesse, and their younger siblings Prince Christoph of Hesse and Richard Wilhelm Leopold. Malcolm XIV (talk) 11:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * For living twin royals, there's Prince Nicolas and Prince Aymeric of Belgium. Looking through Leese's Blood Royal: issue of the kings and queens of medieval England, William de Bohun, 1st Earl of Northampton had a twin brother named Edward. Humphrey Stafford had two twin sons, William and George. Philip II of France had a pair of stillborn twin sons. Burke's Royal Family posits the theory that Empress Matilda was a twin of William III. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) &bull; 11:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, another pair of living royal twins: Prince Philip and Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) &bull; 11:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Waleran de Beaumont, 1st Earl of Worcester and Robert de Beaumont, 2nd Earl of Leicester. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Triplets: (1) Lamidi Olayiwola Adeyemi III, the current Traditional Monarch in the Nigerian region of Oba, is the father of triplets, two girls (Adeola and Adebunmi) and a boy (Adeniran). Source:
 * (2) Per the Romulus and Remus note above, the first three kings of the Fifth dynasty of Egypt were supposed to have been triplets].
 * (For the odds re quadruplets and quintuplets, see Hellin's Law and multiply by the odds of being a royal family...) Best, WikiJedits (talk) 21:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Not only that, but I believe the multiple birth rate (particularly above twins) has increased dramatically in the West (and hence, somewhat in the World average) since IVF and similar treatments. - Jarry1250 [ In the UK? Sign the petition! ] 08:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * (If we're finished with reality,) see The Man in the Iron Mask by Alexandre Dumas, père. B00P (talk) 05:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The Horse and His Boy in C.S.Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia features royal twins, the elder abducted as a baby and raised as a fisherboy. BrainyBabe (talk) 11:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

The Importance of Punctuation
I'm looking for a story I once read in a book about the importance of punctuation. There is a criminal under trial for murder and some authoritative voice (queen?) sends a written message to declare the verdict. The original message is "Impossible, to be condemned," which would have resulted in capital punishment for the criminal. But somewhere along the line, perhaps in the transcription, the comma was dropped, corrupting the message to "Impossible to be condemned," which resulted in the criminal's life being spared. Or the story could have been the other way around, with the criminal accidentally being hung. Is this a true story, and if so, where can I find more details? dlempa (talk) 13:54, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know that particular story, but it brings to mind the famously ambiguous "Let Him Have It". (Punctuation isn't an issue there, so I'm afraid I haven't answered your question.)--Shantavira|feed me 14:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I've heard that story in relation to Catherine the Great of Russia. But I've always had my suspicions about its apocryphality (?), since this just wouldn't work in Russian.  But then, she was Prussian, and maybe she said it in German.  I googled it but came up with nothing.  --  JackofOz (talk) 14:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * (Edit conflict) A similar example is well known in the Nordic languages. A recent Norwegian book about punctuation uses it as the title: "Heng ham ikke vent til jeg kommer", word-by-word translation: "Hang him not wait till I come", which, depending on punctuation translates to: "Hang him, don't wait till I arrive", or "Don't hang him, wait till I arrive". I'm not aware of the example being based on an actual historic event (and I doubt that it is, because if it were, I think the story would have been even better known) . --NorwegianBluetalk 14:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Re Jack's post and my post: How would the wording that I quoted work in Russian or German? --NorwegianBluetalk 15:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I know no German to speak of, and my knowledge of Russian diminishes by the second. Maybe someone else can chip in.  --  JackofOz (talk) 15:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And I know no Russian to speak of, and my knowledge of German diminishes by the second. However, with the help of Google + Google Translate: It almost works in German. --NorwegianBluetalk 15:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, we do have a Language Desk full of many people who are good at translating all sorts of languages... --98.217.71.237 (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * See this, it may be of help. 68.244.39.0 (talk) 15:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's the one. It reminds me, in reverse, of Roger Casement, who was said to have been "hanged by a comma".  --  JackofOz (talk) 15:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Here's another link pointing towards Catherine the great as the origin of the story. --NorwegianBluetalk 15:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * see also Eats, shoots and leaves/--Wetman (talk) 16:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Which title is Bowdlerized from the original "Eats roots shoots and leaves]] (put the commas where you will). "Roots" has a fairly obvious rude meaning in Strine. PhGustaf (talk) 17:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The "root" cause of this ambiguity is that the comma is not just used for separation, it's used in place of "and". That's why proper punctuation is "A, B and C" rather than "A, B, and C", because the latter actually means "A and B and and C". →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 17:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well there it depends what you're saying - A, B, and C can be perfectly valid, as you note, commas are used both for separation and as an 'and' substitute - "A, B, and C" has two commas, which mean two different things - the first is "and", the second is separating. To use some math symbols, "A, B, and C" means A+B+C, but "A, B and C" means A+(B+C).  Without the second comma, the B and C run into each other, with it they are kept apart.  Which of those you want to use.... depends on which you want to say --Saalstin (talk) 18:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree, the semantics are exactly the same. The difference is simply between British English (no commas before 'and') and American English (with commas before 'and'). --Tango (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is not an American/British difference. In both countries some use the serial comma and some, sadly, do not.  Hence the two alternative names for it, "Oxford comma" and "Harvard comma".  --Anonymous, 05:48 UTC, October 4, 2009.
 * The semantics can be extraordinarily different :) --Saalstin (talk) 19:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * As with Mark Twain (as per Hal Holbrook) depicting a child saying "Good-bye, God, I'm going to Missouri", and then reporting that she actually said, "Good, by God, I'm going to Missouri." :) →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 16:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not just commas. There's this one, embedded in this page, which is also somewhere in The Joys of Yiddish. Stalin receives a telegram from Trotsky which reads, "You were right I was wrong I should apologize" which makes Stalin happy until a Yiddish-speaking colleague says that it really reads, "You were right? I was wrong? I should apologize? →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 16:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There was an example of this came up once in a US criminal proceedings. The prosecutors said a woman had called in and confessed, "I killed my baby." What had really happened, it turned out, was that she had, while sleeping, accidentally killed the child (rolled over on it in some bizarre fashion), and was trying to explain that in a state of panic. So the confession wasn't a confession at all, because of its ambiguity, and she was acquitted, in the end. "I (purposefully) killed my baby" and "I (accidentally) killed my baby" are two different phrases, but the dropping of the qualifiers makes a very ambiguous statement... --Mr.98 (talk) 21:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ha, an example from ancient Rome. A prominent Roman senator, in a time of troubles, sent to the prophetess, the Sybyl of Cumae, to know whether he should stay at home or flee into exile lest he be arrested.
 * The Sybyl's answer: DOMINESTES. (At that time, written Latin did not separate letters.) The senator read it as DOMINE STES, i.e. "Lord, stay". He therefore stayed...and was arrested. It turns out the true reading should have been DOMI NE STES --"Do not stay at home".
 * Ah, those prophetesses...what a witty batch o' lassies!
 * And somewhere lurks in my memory the comma that cost the US government billions of dollars...a tax suppressed for the importation of 'fruit nuts' ended up being suppressed for 'fruit,nuts'...yeesh, that is incompetence raised to the level of transcendent genius! Rhinoracer (talk) 20:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And here's one about the importance of capitalisation - see qqzm's post. (It's rather too close to the "bone" for me, unfortunately.)
 * Returning to the original question: I really ought to go back to Russian school or stop making pronouncements about what is possible or not in Russian. I had only ever heard this execution/pardon story from English-language sources, but I now learn it is taught in Russian schools, and the expression "kaznit' nel'zya pomilovat'" (казнить нелзя помиловать) is so well known to Russians that at least one movie has been made with that as its title.  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:49, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

There is an example from Japanese (very well known). It pertains to a sign outside an inn or something which said 'ここではきものをぬいでください', which, depending on whether the comma (here omitted - which is not only possible but in fact usual in older Japanese) comes before or after the 'は' can either mean 'Please take off your shoes here' or 'Please take off your clothes here'. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 00:14, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

A true story of the importance of punctuation was a Canadian lawsuit involving Bell Aliant and Rogers Communications. The two companies had signed a contract that should have said it would
 * continue in force for a period of five (5) years from the date it is made, and thereafter for successive five (5) year terms unless and until terminated by one year prior notice in writing by either party.

but the actual text was:
 * continue in force for a period of five (5) years from the date it is made, and thereafter for successive five (5) year terms, unless and until terminated by one year prior notice in writing by either party.

which meant that 1-year-notice clause took precedence over the 5-year-term specification, making the latter effectively meaningless. When Bell Aliant took advantage of this error to cancel in the middle of a 5-year term, Rogers objected. The initial court ruling was in favor of Bell Aliant, but this was later reversed on the basis that the French version of the contract clearly said what the other one was apparently intended to say. --Anonymous, 06:00 UTC, October 4, 2009.

A very good example is from Marlowe's Edward II:

. Mor._ The king must die, or Mortimer goes down; The commons now begin to pity him: Yet he that is the cause of Edward's death, Is sure to pay for it when his son's of age; And therefore will I do it cunningly. This letter, written by a friend of ours, Contains his death, yet bids then save his life; [_Reads._ _Edwardum occidere nolite timere, bonum est, Fear not to kill the king, 'tis good he die:_ But read it thus, and that's another sense; _Edwardum occidere nolite, timere bonum est, Kill not the king, 'tis good to fear the worst._ Unpointed as it is, thus shall it go. --rossb (talk) 11:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, in the tale "The Adventure of the Proper Comma" in The Memoirs of Solar Pons (1951), "the Sherlock Holmes of Praed Street" decides to investigate due to correct punctuation. A female patient at a mental asylum scratched the message "Help, please" on a stone and tossed it through the fence. Pons was intrigued that she took the trouble to include the comma. B00P (talk) 06:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * And there is the famous "Dear John" letter, used by teachers to this day. Depending on where the punctuation is placed, it is either a declaration of love or an invitation to get lost.Example here. BrainyBabe (talk) 11:28, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Is there any technique to defend yourself from a shark attack?
From the attack of a Great Shark. --190.50.97.170 (talk) 18:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You might check our article on dolphin, which - if I'm recalling correctly - can defend by pounding a shark in a certain spot witht heir snout. Where that is, i don't know, but I suspect it's similar to kicking a male human...well, you get the picture.4.68.248.130 (talk) 18:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Aim for the gills, if memory serves. --Tango (talk) 18:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You should get in a defensive position and fight back. Punch sensitive areas, namely the eyes, gills, and nose, and it should go away.  Still, it's better to just not get in that situation - don't go swimming at twilight, don't wear shiny things, don't carry bloody fish carcasses... ~ Amory  (user • talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * If you are referring to what Quint should have done in the 1975 feature film, I think Chief Brody gave him the best advise when he told him: "Your going to need a bigger boat." 72.58.55.48 (talk) 18:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Following up on that, I suppose blowing up a compressed-air tank could always work as well. ~ Amory  (user • talk • contribs) 19:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Not a chance. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 23:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wait, you're telling me that wasn't real!? ~ Amory ( u •  t  •  c ) 01:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Dunno. Did you need to be told? Your answer to that will answer your own question :) --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 02:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not so sure I would count on blowing up a scuba tank. In any case, predators in general are more inclined to back off if you put up a fight and show no fear. According to this extract from The Worst Case Scenario you should use anything you have and repeatedly whack it in the eyes and gills (not the snout, unless that's all you can reach) and there's a reasonable chance it will back off. If it still eats you up, take solace in the fact that you're helping to improve the survival of a threatened species. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 20:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Scream and thrash up the water.They are alarmed by this...except, unfortunately, the Great White. This is because the Great White Shark is a dedicated predator, and its dedicated prey is roughly man-sized mammals, such as seals, walruses, or homo sapiens (i.e. you and me); thus, a display of thrashing and hollering that might deter a tiger shark or a hammerhead would only signal to a Great White "Mmm, lunch is a bit upset today." Rhinoracer (talk) 20:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * All suggestions here are going along the lines of the best defense is a great offense. This question is easily answered by providing simple defensive measures such as shark tanks, shark suits, and simply staying out of the water. -- <font color='#ff0000'>k <font color='#cc0033'>a <font color='#990066'>i <font color='#660099'>n <font color='#3300cc'>a <font color='#0000ff'>w &trade; 21:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You don't need courage to fight against a shark. Do it like a human being do it. Who needs courage when you can have a weapon? MBelgrano (talk) 21:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

A full-sized great white is far too large to even think about dissuading without a speargun. They will destroy you if they are so inclined. The only reasonable prevention is not to swim in their habitat. Vranak (talk) 23:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia has an article Shark repellent. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The Worst Case Scenario theory would still apply: If attacked by a Great White, try to repeatedly poke it in the eyes and the gills, with speargun, fist, or whatever. There is no guarantee you'll survive, but it will improve your odds, because if you do nothing, you're dead. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 00:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed - I think the question is clearly based on the premise that you are already being attacked, in which case you might as well try. Preventing a shark attack is a completely different, although probably more useful, question. --Tango (talk) 04:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * For the best advice, see here. B00P (talk) 06:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Obviously, the best "defense" against a shark is to stay away from the water. That's not really what OP asked. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 11:52, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well then the answer is, there is no defense. If sharky wants to eat you, then sharky will eat you. Vranak (talk) 17:50, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Our article on shark attacks suggests poking the beast in the eyes or gills, but that assumes you have adequate time (sharks attack fast) and very long arms. More useful (albeit highly contentious) are chemical repellants and the shark billy (a bullet or shotgun shell inside a stick with a trigger that fires on contact). Forget the speargun -- small bore, hard to aim and very likely to really, really annoy the shark. Best advice is to know something about the ocean around you. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Not to shoot the shark, but to poke it in the eyes or gills. Obviously, as with Mongo, if you shoot a great white, you'll just make him mad. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 11:52, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Not to mention that putting blood in the water is a bad idea if he has buddies around... &mdash;  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 17:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * On old nature programs I watched as a kid, divers filming sharks wore a sort of chain mail under (over?) their wetsuits, and carried bang sticks. Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 17:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Looking for newspaper articles
I'm looking for four newspaper stories to help with a Wikipedia article I'm currently working on. Can anyone help? The newspaper articles are:


 * Germany clears its minefields - Philadelphia Inquirer - September 22, 1991
 * Land mines litter East West German border - National Public Radio - Oct 3, 1991
 * Germans work to rid ex-border of land mines - Dallas Morning News - May 6, 1992
 * Former German border almost free of mines - Austin American-Statesman - November 11, 1995

If anyone has access to a newspaper database, could you please see if those articles are there and let me know? -- ChrisO (talk) 23:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * A little-known and very useful Wikipedia page is the resource request. There you can place requests such as yours and someone might come along and help you. --Richardrj talkemail 07:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Heck, I wish I'd known about that years ago. Thanks, Richardrj.  --  JackofOz (talk) 08:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Religion of Lithuania before the Teutonic Knights
What was the religion of Lithuania and the surrounding area before the Teutonic Knights arrived? Our article doesn't say anything about it. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 23:32, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Christianization of Lithuania has some information - mostly a Baltic paganism (see also Lithuanian mythology and Romuva), but there were some Orthodox and Catholic converts. Warofdreams talk 23:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Livonian Crusade is also of relevance. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! The Romuva article was very interesting and the others provided a lot of background info for me. Thanks a lot! --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 09:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)