Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 January 3

= January 3 =

Startup license
In order to start an investment bank/security brokerage, does the entrepreneur have to be licensed as an individual?-- Last  Lived  03:03, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * In which country? The rules surely differ, and we are going to be unlikely to look up the rules in each of the 192 countries in the world.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 05:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * If you are referring to the laws of the United States, the investment bank/brokerage must be registered as a broker-dealer and must be a member of FINRA. If the entrepreneur is to have a senior position with the broker-dealer, then he or she must be a registered principal.  John M Baker (talk) 07:25, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I am referring to as I live in the United States. And by senior position, do you mean as an officer, or as a director? Or both? Do you need such a license to start any kind of financial institution, for that matter (in the US)?-- Last  Lived  02:37, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Banks are highly regulated in the U.S. (and pretty much everywhere else for that matter.) Banks can be registered either as state or national banks, depending on the laws of the state, but almost all state banks, and all federal banks, are FDIC insured, which essentially brings all banks under the umbrella of federal banking laws.


 * If you're trying to start some sort of finance business, it should be painfully obvious that you're going to have to talk to a lawyer; navigating these sorts of regulations would not be easy. Shadowjams (talk) 08:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Both directors and officers of a broker-dealer must be registered principals, if they are actively involved in management. Other employees generally must be registered representatives, unless they have only clerical or ministerial responsibilities.  Licensing requirements for financial institutions in the U.S. depend on the kind of financial institution, but most U.S. financial institutions are subject to some kind of licensing requirement.  Hedge funds are not, but that may change under proposed legislation.  John M Baker (talk) 08:03, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Why you removed certain material that made the US look bad but was true?
Why have you removed the references you had on Fedel Castro that stated he was backed by the US Govt and after his take over proclaimed he was a communist and turned his back on the US? Did you bend to pressure by our Govt to remove the fact they helped a communist take power?70.157.230.88 (talk) 04:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The above note is your only edit. Please provide a diff of what you're specifically referring to. And FYI, wikipedia does not censor publicly-available content. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:56, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * You can look for a diff in the page history of Fidel Castro. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:09, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Which is here: Maybe the OP could point out the specific date and time the info was removed. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:25, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Content discussion needs to take place on the talk pages of the articles themselves—take this to Talk:Fidel Castro. As for why it was removed (if it was): controversial information must be cited to a reliable source. If it is not, it can be removed at any time. The U.S. government has occasionally edited Wikipedia, but never in a truly official capacity, and Wikipedia does not as a policy "bend to pressure" (and to my knowledge pressure has never really been put on it), though since "anyone can edit" that means that information can be added in and be removed by basically anyone. If the information is reliable and cited, though, it should stay in the article as long as people are watching over it. Wikipedia includes many things that are not favorable to the U.S. government, among other governments, which is why it is periodically banned in China, among other places. --Mr.98 (talk) 17:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I do not know the specific date the material was removed. I just know sometime in the last year I was doing research on Castro and I know Wiki had a few paragraphs that talked about him wanting a Democratic process and that the US had helped him gain power in Jan and then around March he came out and stated he was a really a Communist.

Now there is no reference to either him having help from the US nor him proclaiming to want Democracy. NY times archive articles http://www.nytimes.com/ref/world/americas/CASTRO_ARCHIVE.html

I do thank you all for replying. 06:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC) Lisa

Is NEW Delhi really the capital of India
As I can not find a provision in the constitution or a law nor a presidental decree making New Delhi the capital, but there is reference in the constitution to Delhi, it seems to me that Delhi is the capital of India -- as it was of British India from 12.12.1911 on -- and New Delhi just happens to house all supreme institutions of the republic (president, parlament, prime minster, supreme court).

But my changes in the article are opposed because there are semi-offical sources stating that "the capital is New Delhi".

Could you please find a legal text to silence me (or suggest some wording that respects the LEGAL situation and the generally affirmed believe). --85.178.127.159 (talk) 05:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Interesting point. My 2010 edition of The World Almanac states that the capital of India is just plain Delhi. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I would agree that the Sixty-Ninth Amendment to the Indian constitution just establishes Delhi as the "National Capital District", and there's no other provision that makes New Delhi the capital city. Tevildo (talk) 06:41, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * (ec) The question is interesting.  I'm sure you noticed the current Constitution does officially name Delhi the National Capital Territory of Delhi, which is a pretty strong implication, but I, too, don't see the statement "New Delhi shall be the capital of India" in the current Constitution.  I haven't attempted a search of the laws of India to look for this.  To be clear, the "semi-official sources" you're citing are the website of the Government of India and the CIA World Factbook, which are considered reliable sources here on Wikipedia; and you can avoid accusations of original research by avoiding inserting this sort of material in the New Delhi article until you can find a secondary source, other than yourself, that states the same questions as above.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 06:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * (ec)This kind of gets to be hair-splitting. New Delhi is basically a "neighborhood" and is entirely within Delhi. It's a little bit like Washington, DC, is the U.S. capital. Washington itself used to be just a portion of the District of Columbia. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree, New Delhi is just a neighborhood. The whole of Delhi is divided geographically into nine areas of which New Delhi is one, and divided functionally into three municipalities, one for New Delhi, BUT the census of India attributs persons of ALL nine areas/districs to the Delhi municipality and persons of FOUR areas to the New Delhi municipality. So New Delhi does not even have a separate existence from Delhi.
 * Another parallel that comes to mind: there are a number of districts (Bezirke) in Berlin. ALL highest federal institutions are placed in Berlin-Mitte, but that does not make Berlin-Mitte the capital, nor is Whitehall the capital of the UK. --85.178.104.139 (talk) 07:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I think we must give some weight to the fact, that we do have a legal document. Emperor Georg declared Delhi the capital, not New Delhi. Since we do not have a legal text changing the capital, the capital is clearly Delhi. Between 1912 and 1931 the branches of government were physically in the Delhi Cantonment -- could one say "The seat of government was the Delhi Cantonment."? IF YES, we can speak of New Delhi being the seat of government, whereas Delhi is the capital. ??? --85.178.104.139 (talk) 07:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The Government of India has published that New Delhi is the Capital, the CIA factbook states the same. Neither are semi-official sources. explains how the capital and the capital territory were chosen during the British Raj. - Spaceman  Spiff  08:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Your source, the Common Law Abroad, is not correct, in the beginning there was no national district of Delhi, but the "Delhi Imperial Enclave", so much for its accuracy. "India at a glace" is a web site run by the Indian Government, not an legal text.
 * Please read Government of Delhi. As i see it, there is no city of New Delhi with clear borders, a mayor and ..., it can not be the the capital of anything. --85.178.104.139 (talk) 09:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree that this looks like splitting hairs. The question is whether New Delhi is a "city" or a district of a city. People have always said "London," not the City of Westminster, is the capital of the U.K., even when there was no Greater London municipal government. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 09:03, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That's pure original research. No mayor, so it can't be a capital? Please show sources that say that New Delhi isn't the capital. The two sources showing that it is (one a Govt of India website, another the CIA factbook) are credible enough. - Spaceman  Spiff  09:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * (ec)I do not understand what the implication of saying "This looks like splitting hairs" is. Do you want to say: Both "Delhi is the capital of India" AND "NEW Delhi is the capital of India" are correct? Or do you suggest: only the first sentence can be correct, since New Delhi is not even a city -- no matter what people (and web sites) say? --85.178.104.139 (talk) 09:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * No, mayor is not the ONE and ONLY criteria, but one of many. From the point of you of the republic of India there is only Delhi, no Old Delhi, no New Delhi. --85.178.104.139 (talk) 09:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Just an indication that something is wrong with "New Delhi, capital city":
 * In New_Delhi one can read: "The Qutub Festival is a cultural event during which performances of musicians and dancers from all over India are showcased at night, with the Qutub Minar as the chosen backdrop of the event." But the festival site is in an old part of South West Delhi.
 * An other one. Maybe enterprises give New Delhi as their seat, but the street given is in South, South West, or North Delhi. It's just that some people -- including government officials -- think that "New Delhi" sounds better than "Delhi". --85.178.104.139 (talk) 09:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Or even better. In New_Delhi one can read: "The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi does not release any economic figures specifically for New Delhi but publishes an official economic report on the whole of Delhi annually." and the rest is about Delhi. --85.178.104.139 (talk) 09:41, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * To make things clear: I do not say: Because New Delhi is not a local authority with well defined borders it can not be the capital. If there is a Indian law or presidential decree making New Delhi the capital, it IS the capital, but in the absence of a legal text -- and presence of government web sites -- the fact the New Delhi, is not a city, not a town and not a borough with the trapping of a proper local authority, is a strong indication that it is not the capital of India, but just a special part (seat of governemnt) of the National capital. --85.178.104.139 (talk) 10:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow! Lot of confusion here, which is understandable given how many entities in India are referred to (loosely) as Delhi, both historically and at present. Let me see if I can clarify the situation: As you can see, there are lots of Delhis floating around above. But, bottom line to the OP's question: New Delhi is certainly the capital of India, and has been so since 1931. Hope that helps! Abecedare (talk) 10:39, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Historical: The capital of British India was shifted from Calcutta to the Delhi (then part of Punjab Province) in 1911. A new city was designed and constructed in the area by Edwin Lutyens, and formally inaugurated as "New Delhi", the designated capital, in 1931. Following India's independence in 1947, New Delhi remained the capital of India, while Delhi became a Union Territory following the States Reorganization Act of 1956.
 * Current: In 1991 the Government of India reorganized the administration of the region, creating a National Capital Territory of Delhi (National Capital Territory, or NCT, in short; or loosely Delhi), which is a Union Territory and consists of Delhi (bulk of the area), New Delhi (<5% of the area, and the capital of India), and some cantonment areas. The NCT Union Territory is governed by a Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi ("Delhi Government" in short), while its three components are administered by the Muncipal Corporation of Delhi, New Delhi Municipal Council and Delhi Cantonment Board (which falls under the Ministry of Defence of the Union Government), respectively.


 * Dear Abecedare, I disagree, New Delhi was definitely not the capital of British India, and it is not the capital of India. It is just an illdefined part of the capital of India, i.e. of Delhi. New Delhi is at least three things:
 * the new Delhi build by Edwin Lutyens
 * the disctrict of Delhi that houses Rashtrapati Bhavan, parliament, secretariat and the Supreme Court of India...
 * the new parts of Delhi, parts anyone chooses to call "New Delhi"
 * Your are wrong, when you state that the three municipal bodies (one called "corporation", one "council" and one "board") are components of the NCT and adminster distinct areas. When you study the census of India you will see that there is no geographical separation between these statutory towns, they are no local authorities; they just provide services to persons (no to its resp. inhabitants) --85.178.75.15 (talk) 14:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The Union Territory does not consist of Delhi, New Delhi, and some cantonment areas. The NCT consists of Delhi full stop. If you go to the web site of the Muncipal Corporation of Delhi, you see there logo: it shows the whole area of the NCT (without a hole in the middle), and the Census of India states that persons from all nine disctricts (including New Delhi) are counted as somehow belonging to MCD. --85.178.75.15 (talk) 14:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Abecedare, allow me a question: What was the capital of India in 1930? --85.178.88.110 (talk) 16:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I disagree with the assertions above that the confusion is about the borders of New Delhi or Delhi. I interpreted the OP's assertion as:  New Delhi was made the capital before Indian independence, but upon independence, nowhere in the Indian constitution does it actually proclaim New Delhi as the capital, and therefore it is not.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * OP: You misunderstand me. On 12.12.1911 DELHI was proclaimed the capital. Soon afterwards the viceroy and the administration moved to the Delhi Cantt, later to New Delhi. New Delhi was just an area within the "Delhi Imperial Enclave" -- just as the Delhi Cantt. New Delhi became the SEAT of government, but Delhi was and is the capital. It is not only the constitution (which refers several times to Delhi, but not to New Delhi) that is relevant, but the absence of ANY legal document (law, decree) that establishes that part of the center of Delhi as the capital. Excuse me for repeating this: Many inhabitants of South Delhi think New Delhi sounds more modern, richer, better, so they tell you -- in good faith -- that they live in New Delhi, but they do not. It's the same with the capital (unless someone comes up with a legal text proving me wrong). --85.178.88.110 (talk) 22:13, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Taj Mahal - True History?
Is Taj Mahal build by Shahjahan?

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/true_story_of_the_taj_mahal.htm

Are the points noted down by P. N. Oak has been taken into consideraton? Gurugsk (talk) 09:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * If you can find reliable sources that present a divergent view, then please begin a discussion on the talk page, preparatory to adding the view into the article in an unbiased way. But a self-published website is not considered a reliable source. Furthermore Exceptional claims require exceptional sources --ColinFine (talk) 14:05, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Uninterpretable question
What is the nearest MRT to NUS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.189.62.196 (talk) 15:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Crystal128-fonts.svg|20px]] Please use a descriptive title in future questions. Heading added
 * If you gave us some hint of which MRT or NUS you meant, or even what country you are in, there might be some chance of answering you. --ColinFine (talk) 15:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The user geolocates to Singapore, so the question could be "which is the nearest Mass Rapid Transit (station) to the National University of Singapore?" --NorwegianBluetalk 15:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * To which the answer is Buona Vista MRT Station on the East-West line. Tevildo (talk) 16:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * And, if that interpretation of the question is correct, this page (which was the first google hit for MRT NUS) may be of interest. --NorwegianBluetalk 16:13, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I only hope the OP isn't stuck on a mountain in Greenland waiting for an answer! Grutness...wha?  23:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * There's a lot of situations in which I turn to Wikipedia for an answer... I'm not sure stuck on a mountain in Greenland is one of them! :) -GTBacchus(talk) 00:17, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

African writing or literature from early 19th. century
I'm reading a memoir by someone who lived in Africa during the early 19th. century, and he says that people could commonly read and write. Besides reading the Koran, they were fond of writing things as well. Have any writings like these survived to today? And if so, where could I read them? From his description, an African town he visited was very similar in work and industry to a european town of the same time. 78.146.54.230 (talk) 15:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Africa's a big place...in some places literacy is completely normal. Where did this person live? Adam Bishop (talk) 15:48, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * And which African languages were written in the earl 19th century?--Radh (talk) 15:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Probably quite a few West African languages were written using forms of Arabic script (see Ajami script). Also Amharic in Ethiopia. --ColinFine (talk)


 * (ec) I think the place you're looking for is Timbuktu, where a vast library of medieval texts is in the early stages of being preserved. See The manuscripts and libraries of Timbuktu --TammyMoet (talk) 16:51, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * (ec) Hausa was almost never witten before the British asked the local leaders to correspond with them using "Ajami script". People spoke Hausa, but wrote Arabic. -- Similar to west-northern India, where many Muslims spoke Hindustani, but wrote Persian (sometimes even Arabic). --85.178.88.110 (talk) 16:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I do not know what country the man was in, but he lived at a place called Kambia at the mouth of the River Pongo, which was near Cape Verga. The town he visited was called Timbo. 78.146.54.230 (talk) 18:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Perhaps Kambia, in North-West Sierra Leone near the border with Guinea. There appears to be a rivier Pongo in Guinea, as well as a town called Timbo, which "was formerly an important religious centre and is still known for its eighteenth century mosque". Whether there are any non-Arabic records there I do not know. --ColinFine (talk) 19:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Any language will do, if there is a translation. The book-learning goes back a surprisingly long way "The tariks of Timbo (annals in the Peul language but written in Arabic script) noted that in the year 1105...." - perhaps more advanced than European culture. 78.147.11.181 (talk) 22:39, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have an answer, but I may have some leads. Timbo was the capital of the Kingdom of Fouta Djallon, which, from the earth 18th century to the end of the 19th, was a bit of a Mecca (pun intended) for Muslim intellectuals in West Africa and beyond. The main local ethnic group was the Fula people, who developed Ajami script, seemingly a modified version of the Arabic alphabet, in order to write in their own language. Our Fouta Djallon article names Tierno Muhammadu Samba Mombeya, Tierno Saadu Dalen, Tierno Aliou Boubha Ndyan, and Tierno Jaawo Pellel as accomplished writers from this period. - Fullobeans (talk) 02:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * After more Googling: this book has some good information, but mentions that most of the writing you're interested in is hard to get one's hands on, as it hasn't been published and/or is in private collections. The French Wikipedia has an article on Tierno Aliou Boubha Ndyan, if you know any French. - Fullobeans (talk) 02:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Book about entire human race existing to give an alien/robot a piece of metal
I remember hearing about this book many months ago and I looked it up on Wikipedia because of its interesting premise, I just don't know the title of it. It's premise is something like a character who has a broken spaceship creates or somehow uses our universe/earth to get a piece of scrap metal to fix his spaceship. I am dying to figure this out, so please post anything that comes to your mind, thank you very much! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.245.188.225 (talk) 16:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, although in a sense it's the same idea. Somehow I'm thinking it's a Vonnegut story. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:41, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The Sirens of Titan --ColinFine (talk) 16:45, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The Man Who Fell to Earth co-opted world technology to assemble his ride home.--Wetman (talk) 20:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I think its Sirens of Titan; thanks to all three of you! --71.245.188.225 (talk) 03:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

New Journalism
I am working on the article The New Journalism, a would like the access this article The Review of Politics, Vol. 36, No. 2 (Apr., 1974), pp. 306-309. Also trying to find and access the article, The New Journalism, 1: Not Necessarily What is New in Journalism. By Don R. Pember in Journal of Communication Volume 25, Issue 3, Pages 185 - 189. 1975. Thanks in advance what.is.the.1404[at]gmail.com.

Do you think you could help me find when the article Gear by Richard Goldstein was published in the Village Voice, the article Timing and a Diversion: The Cocoa Game by  George Goodman (under the pen name "Adam Smith") was published in New York World Journal Tribune, and when Beth Ann and Macrobioticism by Robert Christgau was published in New York Herald Tribune? Thanks in advance. The Ministry (talk) 16:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * On the first one, I was going to suggest you file a request on the resource request page, but I see you've already done that. --Richardrj talkemail 09:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * In the rather unlikely event that you haven't done so already, have you tried searching the archives at the Village Voice? That might give you one date. —— Shakescene (talk) 12:15, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The online archive only goes back to 97. And I live in Sweden so I can't visit the archives at american libraries. The Ministry (talk) 21:16, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Lyrics too leadbelly song
Does anyone know the lyrics to, or where i can get the lyrics too "scottsboro boys" by leadbelly?? Its for a Project. I appreciate the help!! :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iluvgofishband (talk • contribs) 21:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Most modern song lyrics are still under copyright, and so cannot legally be posted anywhere on the web. Links to illegal sites are not permitted in Wikipedia, so I'm afraid we can't help you. You may be able to buy a copy of the song somewhere. --ColinFine (talk) 23:48, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Call me a rebel... Go to Google, type in [Lyrics Scottsboro Leadbelly] and you'll get dozens of sites that have the lyrics.  Dismas |(talk) 00:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Leadbelly is sixty years dead, but a certain evil person, inspired by an inked rodent, got some really horrible copyright laws passed. Tread softly.  PhGustaf (talk) 00:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

musical instrument key/scale
What makes a "B flat" clarinet "B flat"? How does the clarinet player know what note to play when the conductor says "play Concert C"? thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.192.104 (talk) 21:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * All explained at Transposing instrument. In brief, the basic scale of the instrument, that you get by uncovering the holes one by one, is the scale of Bb. Many instruments are conventionally written at concert pitch, so a C is written as a C; but some instruments, particularly those that come in families, are written as though their natural scale was C, even though it is actually Bb, or A or Eb. This has the advantage that a clarinet or saxophone player can switch to an instrument in a different key and play the written notes exactly the same, even though they sound different pitches. Contrast that with recorders, which are in different keys but are conventionally written at concert pitch (though sometimes at the wrong octave): if you change from a tenor recorder (in C) to an alto (in F) you have to change the fingering for the notes on the page. --ColinFine (talk) 23:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Maybe I just wasn't paying attention all those other times, but that's the clearest and simplest explanation of this hitherto baffling practice I've ever read, Colin, so thank you. --   Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   00:12, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Right. The king of transposing instruments was Adolphe Sax, who when he put a large single-reed mouthpiece on an ophicleide to make a saxophone planned them in a huge range of sizes and pitches: B-flat and E-flat intruments for bands, and F and C instruments for orchestras.  (For some reason orchestras like instruments with sharps in them whilst bands like instruments with flats in them. The F  horn is a modest anomaly, with only one flat in it.  Orchestral trumpets and clarinets are more often in C or A than the bandish B-flat.  The CC contrabass tuba is likelier to be in tune than the BB-flat model.)  The F and C saxophones never caught on (though a few still play the C melody model).  Adam Carse wrote one of the best books about this, but the reader should be aware he didn't like jazz much. PhGustaf (talk) 00:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * So when the conductor says "Play concert C" the F horn player plays his G. Presumably the Bb clarinet player plays his D. This has never made any sense to me. Edison (talk) 01:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The conductor doesn't often say that. The players with transposing instruments just play the notes as written, and it more or less works out.  Long ago I played parts written in E-flat on an F horn, which involved adding or subtracting three flats from the key signature. I forget which.  I mostly got the note as close to right as one might expect from a horn. Musicians have to know how to shuffle keys around. PhGustaf (talk) 02:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It astounds me that the questions and answers in the post make any sense to anybody :)  DRosenbach  ( Talk 13:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, I could have written a much longer bit about banjo tunings. PhGustaf (talk) 19:53, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * All the above answers are pretty much true from my experience in High School band, but the simplest answer to the How does the clarinet player know what note to play when the conductor says "play Concert C" part is, that's what they were taught as musicians.Aaronite (talk) 18:34, 4 January 2010 (UTC)