Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2011 November 11

= November 11 =

Bullet...in Ancient India ?
This page states this hymn petitiononline.com/vedas/petition.html from Atharva Veda. It decrees a cow-killer to be with a bullet of lead ! Does this means that ancient Indians (Hindus) living far before than Christ did know about guns ? Jon Ascton   (talk)  06:42, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Slingers routinely used lead bullets as they were more deadly than stones. Fifelfoo (talk) 07:19, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The above 'lead bullet' being redlinked, you may also be interested in the article Bullet. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.122 (talk) 08:59, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * As the "bullet" page says, "The history of bullets far predates the history of firearms. Originally, bullets were metallic or stone balls used in a sling as a weapon and for hunting." In any case, it's a translation, so you'd want to know what the original said, in the original language. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:01, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Sling_(weapon) is also worth a read. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:41, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

The point here is that a 'bullet' is simply a small dense object used as a projectile, one that relies on velocity more than size to do its damage. what we think of as bullets are actually a combination of a bullet and propellant cartridge designed to be used in modern guns, but throwing small hard objects at enemies is by no means a modern invention. -- Ludwigs 2 02:14, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Organisations giving psychiatric services to US Federal Prisons
I've looked in your [|B.O.P. page], their site, A.P.A, N.P.A and many other Psychiatry sites, articles, books etc'. I just can't seem to find specific, reliable, updated sources describing the organisations responsible for administrating psychiatric services within the federal prison system (forensic and therapeutic). There are a few general comments, but nothing particular. I'm interested especially in the California federal prison system. 84.108.22.162 (talk) 10:32, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

INADMISSABLE EVIDENCE - THE JURY - BRITISH TV LEGAL DRAMA
This is NOT a request for Legal Advice - merely informed comment. A TV drama currently being aired in the UK illustrates the re-trial of an alleged multiple murderer after an appeal court ruling found the original verdict unsafe and ordered a fresh trial, on the basis of a piece of inadmissable evidence having been presented. The detail of that is not necessary here. But one of the new jurors is given knowledge of that inadmissable evidence by one of the original jurors who appears to be acting on behalf of the original jury who were unhappy with the appeal court ruling as they were overwhelmingly convinced of the accused's guilt. The purpose of planting this knowlege is that the new juror will hopefully share it with his fellow jurors - totally against the rules of the court and the judge and the appeal court - and influence them to confirm the original guilty verdict. But surely - that information would already be in the public domain as part of the appeal court's published decision, and that knowledge might already be known to some if not all of the new jury from press and other media reports. So how can the new trial even begin to be safe given that the new jury might already be "contaminated" by that knowledge? OK, it's only a TV Drama I know, but I would still appreciate an informed opinion from you good folk here. Thanks. 94.172.118.132 (talk) 12:12, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know about the drama, but in real life all juries are told not to research the case themselves. The judge will also try and find jurors that don't already know about the case (there are plenty of people that don't follow the news very closely, so that shouldn't be too difficult in all but the most high-profile cases). Apart from that, it is just assumed that jurors will do as they are told and base their verdict on only what they hear in court (there's not a lot else the judge can do). --Tango (talk) 13:16, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It is not unusual for judges to direct the jury to ignore specific issues, which are either legally irrelevant, or where no doubt remains. Of course, the jury may think that doubt remains, but they cannot use that as reasoning. Already, the jury is being asked to narrow its view. The important part is that the jury are formally told to ignore it. I also agree with Tango. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 16:45, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course, just because a judge has told the jury to do something doesn't mean they have to. A jury cannot be asked the explain their decisions (nor are they allowed to explain their decisions should they wish to) and they cannot be held to account for those decisions. If their decision was that the defendant was guilty, then the defendant can appeal and if the appeal judge thinks they jury were being completely unreasonable then he can order a new trial. If the jury finds the defendant not guilty, though, then that's usually final (see double jeopardy and jury nullification for more on this topic). --Tango (talk) 18:14, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ...nor are they allowed to explain their decisions should they wish to...: Were you talking about the UK in particular, Tango? We've already seen a juror from the Conrad Murray trial go on TV and talk at length about her reasons for convicting him.  --   Jack of Oz   [your turn]  18:59, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Since the OP is specifically about a "British TV Legal Drama," it would be no more than logical for Tango to do so. It is indeed an offense - Contempt of court - in England & Wales subsequently to reveal the jury's deliberations. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.78.15 (talk) 21:31, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Special rules apply in UK re double jeopardy since 2003 Double_jeopardy Kittybrewster  &#9742;  20:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the enlightenment. --   Jack of Oz   [your turn]  21:40, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * While I largely agree with Tango I would note that in both the UK, NZ and I believe Australia there is often restrictions on reporting of ongoing cases to amongst other reasons, to try and prevent the jury being prejucidiced. E.g.   sub judice. Note that this isn't just about speculation or stuff that may be untrue, as may be clear from the sources one common area of concern tends to be revealing factual details which it's considered is too prejudicial for the jury to hear such as any previous convictions (of other crimes) which can usually only be revealed in to the jury restricted circumstances (mostly when the crimes are similar enough in details that they are considered relevent without being unduly prejudicial). If you pay attention, you may sometimes notice how details which were revealed while the cases was still under investigation are no longer mentioned in the media once the case goes before the court. While obviously not perfect, I think this often worked before because realisticly in most cases unless the person either read the details before and then didn't mention it when asked during jury selection, or someone contacted them as in the case the OP mentioned and they again didn't tell the judge they usually wouldn't find such details unless they put in a lot of effort.
 * In the modern internet world however it's often relatively trivial to find such details and a lot more (stuff which the media wouldn't have reported in the first place), even inadvertedly let alone if you make a small effort (e.g. just type a name into an internet search engine). And so those involved are still trying to work out how to handle the current reality . Jurors have been found with internet printouts for example (see also the earlier ref) and while the media have sometimes been ordered to remove stuff from their archives  that doesn't help with all the other stuff on the internet plus if the international media took an interest in the case they would usually ignore such orders. (This is also something wikipedia struggles with, e.g. Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons/Archive 20 & Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons.)
 * BTW as may be clear from some of the refs, this sort of thing could easily result in a mistrial if the judge or any of the laywers find out. Note that if the juror is going to reveal the details to the other juror, it means not just that juror has to keep it a secret, but so do all the other jurors.
 * Nil Einne (talk) 16:48, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Weather websites
I'm try to figure out weather for the coming week, and going through various websites. As always, weather appears very difficult to predict and the different websites give quite different info. Does anyone know if there are differences in quality between different sites? Anyone with better sources than others? --Soman (talk) 12:39, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The best site probably depends on where in the world you are. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:38, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * For European and North American countries at least, the best weather website is usually the website of the government meteorological service. Most other sites depend heavily on forecasts from these government services. Marco polo (talk) 18:53, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * BBC is brilliant for UK, based as Marco says on UK Meteorological Office, but nothing special for elsewhere in the world. I had a wonderful site for France, forecasts for farmers, but the link is dead. Anywhere, you're dependent on whether someone has put in the effort to do a good forecast. I think you might be in South Asia? In which case all I have ever seen is CNN's sweeps round the whole globe, sorry can't help. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:01, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * If you are in India, the India Meteorological Department (IMD) has decent data for India, although its website is not terribly user-friendly. Still, I suspect that other forecasters rely on its data.  I would get to know IMD's site and test whether some other site, such as the BBC, does a better job.  Marco polo (talk) 21:11, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, go straight to the primary source, the local government weather service. The commercial forecasters just add their own opinions to this information. If you want pretty girls, use commercial TV. No improvement in the forecast though. HiLo48 (talk) 21:13, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks like the OP is not in the US, but just to cover the bases, the US federal weather service, which other forecasts are largely based on, is the National Weather Service. Pfly (talk) 01:47, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have been more specific. It deals with East Africa. --Soman (talk) 08:38, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. I suspect that meteorological services in East African countries fall short of developed-world standards due to a shortage of funding for equipment and trained personnel. However, this site has links to national meteorological services in several countries.  You might also compare the BBC's global forecasts.  Marco polo (talk) 02:33, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Business Continuity Institute
The article Business Continuity Institute doesn't seem to be very neutral. Can anyone tell me, whether the BCI is a consulting company or a public institution and whether it is trustworthy? 85.178.186.249 (talk) 17:19, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * It's a professional institution, and comes with that caveat. The article is marketing blurb, as with any of these bodies they make their money from memberships and conference fees.
 * Whether it is trustworthy or not is a matter of judgement. Did you follow the link through to their own home page?
 * ALR (talk) 17:31, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I did and this even made me more curious to know what their role in business continuity planning and risk management really is. 85.178.186.249 (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Depends on your view on the usefulness of professional institutions.
 * Personal perspective, something like that is only really a subset of other disciplines and the value of an institution could be delivered by others.
 * Health warning on my view though, I'm a Chartered Engineer and Member of the Institution of Engineering and Technology.
 * ALR (talk) 18:42, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Voyage autour du monde sur les corvettes Uranie et la Physicienne
Does anybody know where I can the complete work of Louis de Freycinet's expedition which is mention in the article with this sentence, "The results of this voyage were published under Freycinet's supervision, with the title of Voyage autour du monde sur les corvettes Uranie et la Physicienne en 1824–1844, in 13 quarto volumes and 4 folio volumes of plates and maps."? Preferably a version with good resolution images of the plates and maps. Thanks.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 22:26, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Google Books has the volumes for 1824, 1826, and 1839, etc. All of them are public domain and can be downloaded in PDF form. As for the rest, There's a list of "related books" on that page that will take you to others in Google Books. Some may not be available however.


 * I've found similar papers from other French expeditions (the Coquille and the Astrolabe) from the Biodiversity Heritage Library and the Internet Archive, both are digital repositories and it may be worth looking there. However, their coverage of non-English public domain works is less extensive and if you still can not find the complete works, they may have simply not been digitized yet.


 * I also recommend creating a request in WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request‎, they specialize in tracking down references and can even give you copies for articles in paywall academic journals.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   23:17, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * They all seem to be just text. Did they even contain any illustrations? --KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:31, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * From the description you provided, the plates and maps seem to be published separately in an additional four volumes.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   23:40, 11 November 2011 (UTC)