Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2012 December 12

= December 12 =

Belgian counterparts to Conservative Party UK, UMP, PDL, People's Spain and Social democrat portugal
Which party is the Belgian counterpart to UK's Conservative Party, France's UMP, Italy's PDL, Netherlands' PVV, Spain's People's Party and Potugal's Social Democrat Party? -- 01:43, 12 December 2012‎ User:Donmust90


 * I believe the last time you went on a bender asking many similar questions in the past along these lines, you were directed to "Politics of XXXX" articles. Try Politics of Belgium, for example.  You can find the answers to these sorts of questions by going to similarly titled articles.  -- Jayron  32  01:45, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Donmust90 -- as far as I know, almost all Belgian political parties are either specifically Walloon (French-speaking) or specifically Flemish, so there's unlikely to be one answer. AnonMoos (talk) 13:34, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * European_People's_Party has a list of all equivalent parties. Christian Democratic and Flemish (CD&V) and Humanist Democratic Centre (cdH) are part of the league. OsmanRF34 (talk) 23:46, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Election symbols of each party of each nation
Is there a website that shows election symbol of each party of each nation? for example Shas of Israel is letters Shin and Samekh, Danish People's Party is O, Awami League of Bangladesh is a boat and etc? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donmust90 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how many countries have a formalised system for things like that. Isn't שס the full name of the party, though? Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 04:42, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * They're probably only really important when they appear on ballots, as they do in India and a few U.S. states, such as Missouri (see http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/ballotsymbols.asp ). AnonMoos (talk) 13:27, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * As far as I know, there is no such website that systematically gathers election symbols or election ballots worldwide. Perhaps you'd like to start one? We can't do it on wikipedia due to copyright issues. --Soman (talk) 08:29, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Benjamin Franklin's signature
Something curious was pointed out to me on OTRS, and I just managed to confuse myself. We are currently using File:Benjamin Franklin Signature.svg to display old Ben's signature in our article on him, and this signature comes from a now-public-domain book written in Swedish. There is no context given to Ben's signature, so I have no idea where it came from. But what makes it interesting is that this signature looks nothing like something we are certain is Ben's, his signature at the bottom of this little document. So I'm left asking two questions: A) Is the signature used in our article actually authentic Ben? And B) If so, where did that signature come from? Thanks. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:36, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Except for the fact that one says "Benj." and the other just uses "B" (a not uncommon phenomenon in older signatures), they both look remarkable similar to me. The "B" is written in exactly the same way in both examples, and so is the "Franklin" part. You can see another authenticated version of the "B Franklin"-type signature here. --Saddhiyama (talk) 14:26, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think we here at this reference desk can be the judge of authenticity... I doubt any of us are professional signature appraisers. In other words... like legal advice, we should refer this to experts. Blueboar (talk) 16:36, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, because, just like medical and legal advise, amateur information here could cause serious harm to readers if it is incorrect. --jpgordon:==( o ) 17:40, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Regarding your second question, the article in Nordisk familjebok from whence the image came does not list the sources for its autographs (from what I can tell), but it does say that the best collections of autographs can be found in "Delarues' Isographie des hommes célèbres (4 vol.; 1843) and The autographic mirror (4 vol., 1864–66), published in London." The autograph might be snipped from either of those. Gabbe (talk) 05:12, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Did the USSR collect taxes?
I recently saw someone claim that the USSR had no system of taxation. Is this true? It sounds ridiculous, but on the other hand the state presumably funded itself to some extent through the revenues of state-owned land and enterprises, exports etc. And there wouldn't have been much in the way of corporate profit to tax. If most people are employed by the state then presumably income tax wouldn't have achieved much either (is there any difference between paying someone $100 and taxing half of it, or just paying them $50 in the first place?). ManyQuestionsFewAnswers (talk) 05:03, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Yea, I believe they were paid on the order of 1/10th what people in the West made at the same job, so essentially it was equivalent to a 90% income tax. StuRat (talk) 05:10, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Can you cite a source for your beliefs, StuRat? AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:43, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, you can compare the GDP per capita, by year, of the US, here, versus the Soviet Union, here. You will see the the US ran at about 10X the Soviet Union.  (Yes, GDP per capita isn't exactly the same as wage rates, but it gives you an idea.) StuRat (talk) 06:06, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * With respect, even these graphs are incomparable, since they use different scales of reference (2005 Dollars and 2011 Dollars respectively). Also I'm not quite sure whether the price measure means that the graphs are adjusted for inflation or they represent purchasing power parity. (Which just shows that I should look at economic texts more often.) Your argument might also ignore the problem that is produced by fixed prices in creating a PPP. Finally own Article on GDP has a small criticism section, which is worth reading. --Abracus (talk) 08:31, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * There wasn't much inflation in the US dollar between 2005 and 2011, but you can adjust for the small amount there was, if you wish. StuRat (talk) 18:30, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * That is one of the dumbest responses i've ever seen. stu, quit responding to things that you don't actually know about. We all get it, you're educated and logical. But you make all kinds of wrong statements at the ref desk in doing so, and with a frequency that is surprising. Stop it. Stop pontificating about things you don't know about, and while we all do that, more importantly, at least indicate when you're just musing about stuff. This has been going on for years now. You need to reel it in. Shadowjams (talk) 04:10, 13 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Maybe so. But in the meantime, you need to reel in your personal attacks, especially making them in front of the OP. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:28, 13 December 2012 (UTC)


 * And just saying a response is "dumb", without explaining your reasons, much less proving them, is also quite a useless comment. StuRat (talk) 09:33, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * He's right - inflation between 2005 and 2011 is not enough to make any qualitative difference to this discussion. That said, GDP per capita is completely useless for these purposes. It's a measure of productivity. Usually, productivity is quite a useful proxy for wages, but for this purpose it is completely useless. Doing work worth $150 and getting paid $100, of which $40 is taken in tax, and doing work worth $150 and getting paid $60 would appear in exactly the same way in the GDP per capita - they both appear as just $150. --Tango (talk) 12:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)


 * This article seems to imply that while there was a personal income tax system in the USSR, it was not particularly meaningful and had little individual effect. The author (a Soviet minister at the end of the USSR) suggests that in general one can regard the USSR as effectively having no tax system, largely because the structure of its economy treated resources in a very different way than a capitalist system. In the late 1980s as part of the various economic reforms, there were some beginnings of a tax structure added, apparently. There were also some miscellaneous Soviet tax laws (see Category:Taxation in the Soviet Union for some of these) but the take-away message for me is that any attempt to make sense of things like taxes or profits or wages in the USSR requires taking the time to understand how their command economy worked, because trying to make sense of concepts understood easiest under capitalism in the context of a long-running socialist state is going to lead to some inevitable confusion and category error. --Mr.98 (talk) 11:59, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

ManyQuestionsFewAnswers -- the short answer to your question is "Yes, there were taxes", though due to the way the Soviet system was set up, direct personal income taxes were unimportant for most of the people most of the time. From perusing the book "An Economic History of the USSR" by Alec Nove (ISBN 0-14-021403-8) probably the most important tax which was explicitly called a tax by the Soviet authorities was the "turnover tax", which was kind of a Soviet version of Value Added Tax, but calibrated to siphon money out of sectors which the Soviet authorities did not consider essential to basic industrial development, and to capture large paper profits which some enterprises made because the centrally-set prices of their inputs were out of whack with the centrally-set prices of the products which they produced. However, there were many other methods of extracting money or goods which were not called taxes. Agricultural units had compulsory quotas of grain etc. they were required to hand over to the state, and the prices of the quota deliveries for most food products were often set very low (under Stalin, sometimes absurdly low), though "commercial" crops such as cotton were more favored. (One of the main points of the Kolkhoz system was that a Kolkhoz peasant had "residuary legatee" status, only receiving an income after all other Kolkhoz obligations and expenditures had been met, so that the state did not have to pay the Kolkhoz peasant a guaranteed income, as it did the state farm peasant.) For many years under Stalin, workers were required to set aside a certain part of their income for "voluntary" state bond purchases which were really not voluntary (and sometimes the bonds were not repaid according to the original provisions). Also, on December 14, 1947, Stalin decreed a so-called "currency reform" quite similar to the North Korean manipulation of a few years back -- coins and bills owned by individuals were declared to be worth 1/10th their previous value, personal bank accounts under 3,000 rubles kept their value, while prices and wages remained the same. This was a blatant measure by Stalin to take away the accumulated wartime savings of many peasants, which Stalin didn't feel that they deserved to have (peasants rarely had bank accounts in the Soviet Union at that time). On the other side, housing was almost fully state-subsidized and rents were generally extremely cheap. AnonMoos (talk) 14:44, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Why did the peasants have wartime savings ? Were they actually paid properly during the war (perhaps to discourage desertion, as was a problem in WW1) ? StuRat (talk) 18:37, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The "free market" prices -- which foodstuffs grown beyond the mandatory requisition quotas could be sold for -- were sky-high. "Those peasants who could sell at these prices became rich. Many held on to their gains, waiting for the day when there would be something to buy with their roubles.  In chapter 11, it will be shown how they were prevented from utilizing their gains." -- Nove p.283.
 * As for Germans, if they had abolished the kolkhozes and divided the land among peasant families, and made a strong appeal to Ukrainian nationalism backed up by some visible concrete actions, then they could have forged a strong alliance with the inhabitants that would have made much of the occupied western parts of the Soviet Union exceedingly resistant to any form of return of communist authority. However, the Nazi leaders' habits of viewing Slavs as untermenschen prevented them from seizing this opportunity, and the basic structures of the kolkhozes were left in place to serve as convenient units for the German extraction of crops from the peasantry.  There were individual Ukrainians and Russians who joined the German military, but many others did not view German occupation with such affection that they were willing to stick out their necks or take any risks to prolong it, no matter how much they hated the Bolsheviks or Stalin... AnonMoos (talk) 21:21, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I see. Those peasants would have been wise to take their payments in some form other than rubles, such as in barter for other goods. StuRat (talk) 17:57, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


 * There was almost literally nothing to buy during the war years beyond the most basic necessities -- consumer goods production was cut back, and took a distinct second priority to military production. They couldn't put the money in land... AnonMoos (talk) 15:30, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Invest in Fabergé eggs. :-) StuRat (talk) 21:31, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Sounds like there was a lot of truth to what Will Rogers said: "In Russia, they ain't got no income tax; but they ain't got no income!" ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:26, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

feline Internet sensation
I'm well-aware of these two feline Internet stars. They're Lil Bub and Tardar Sauce the Grumpy Cat. There's a third one. He's a fierce-looking, fluffy gray cat named Colonel Meow. I'm trying to find out if he has a website. Does he?142.255.103.121 (talk) 08:52, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The best source of information for this stuff is Knowyourmeme, which has a page on Colonel Meow here, including information on his facebook page. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:59, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * If anyone is wondering what they all look like, here you go. Dismas |(talk) 10:14, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

I know Colonel Meow has a Facebook page. But does he have his own website other than that?142.255.103.121 (talk) 18:24, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * His Facebook page has the link http://colonelmeow.tumblr.com/ which may be what you're after. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:59, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Not really. I was looking for a website which has a store.142.255.103.121 (talk) 20:40, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Not everyone monetizes these things. &mdash;  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 23:32, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't forget "Happycat", which we unfortunately don't have a picture of at I Can Has Cheezburger?, although I think that feline would qualify. Shadowjams (talk) 19:58, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, he's the very first submission to that website, using the iconic "I can has cheezburger?" text. Their search engine on the new site is crap, which makes it almost impossible to find. &mdash;  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 19:45, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Alternative lifestyle
The linked article seems to be very biased toward Western attitudes of an alternative lifestyle. Examples include reincarnation and practicing Eastern religions by Westerners. If a person is from the East, then that person would not feel that those lifestyles are "alternative", but rather the norm. I have the impression that alternative lifestyle just means "not widespread or mainstream but nevertheless still relatively acceptable". So, a Christian convert in China would be an example of an alternative lifestyle. Christianity is really a minority religion in China, so it would fit the definition of an alternative lifestyle. So, an example of what counts as an "alternative lifestyle" is highly variable, depending on the situation and location, and may or may not be acceptable, depending on the situation and location. I wonder where you draw a line between a person practicing an alternative lifestyle in a country versus a foreigner who travels to a particular country and practices his native religion, which is not predominant in the new location. For example, a devout Jewish person from Israel immigrates to the United States and practices his native religion instead of converting to Christianity or ceasing religious practice, or an American practicing veganism in his native country. 140.254.227.69 (talk) 15:33, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * In China, even the Communist party seems to believe in reincarnation, since an official reincarnation decree was issued, giving the government control over reincarnations... AnonMoos (talk) 15:50, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * That article is unsourced and, in my opinion, pretty questionable. In a religiously pluralistic country, such as the United States, and I think China, practicing a minority religion does not really count as an "alternative lifestyle". If a person lives in much the same way as his or her compatriots (in the United States that means attending school or working or looking for work depending on one's age, avoiding illicit drugs, generally obeying the law except maybe sometimes traffic laws, practicing serial monogamy and possibly heterosexuality, and participating to some degree in consumerism), then a relatively small matter like practicing Judaism or some other minority religion doesn't really count as an "alternative lifestyle". In the United States, I don't think belief in reincarnation counts as an alternative lifestyle. Veganism is kind of a borderline case.  These days, I don't think it counts as an alternative lifestyle by itself in the United States.  Homosexuality used to be the classic example of an "alternative lifestyle" in the United States, but a revolution is underway, and I'm not sure that, by itself, it counts as an alternative lifestyle any more, at least in big US cities outside the South.  Marco polo (talk) 16:14, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Since serial monogamy practically means marriage, divorce, and remarriage, that would imply that divorce is the norm, and lifetime monogamous marriage is alternative? 140.254.227.69 (talk) 16:39, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Not sure what you're talking about -- that article is fairly fully sourced. AnonMoos (talk) 21:44, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * In my view, the concept of being alternative is itself part of Western culture, and probably does not transfer to any other culture. Obviously, a member of a different culture can live in different manner from their culture, but alternative means more than that, in at least two respects that I can think of: the kind of attitudes and practices likely to be meant by it (as in the article criticised above); and the place that alternative has in our culture. --ColinFine (talk) 16:47, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm wondering why the concept wouldn't be referred to as an "alternate lifestyle" in the USA. --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  18:54, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why, Jack, that's just how it is. As for lifelong monogamy being an "alternative lifestyle", that's not the case. When I said "serial monogamy", I just meant one monogamous relationship at any given time. People who have divorced and those who have never divorced can both be mainstream in the United States. Finally, I have to agree with ColinFine; I think the very idea of an "alternative lifestyle" is probably a Western one. Other cultures may have concepts like "deviant" or "outsider" for people with non-mainstream ways of life. Marco polo (talk) 19:17, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, only Western culture has stopped persecuting people (in most cases) for having a different but harmless lifestyle. In most other cultures that have refused to modernize, being different means being a second-class citizen at best, and being imprisoned, killed, and/or tortured into submission at worst.  --140.180.249.194 (talk) 00:55, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Methodist monarchs
Have there been any monarchs who practiced Methodism besides the monarchs of Tonga?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 15:45, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Probably Seru Epenisa Cakobau of Fiji, according to the Taukei ni Waluvu article.
 * Malietoa Talavou Tonumaipe’a of Samoa (and possibly successors?) (if you count the Samoan Malietoas as monarchs. 184.147.123.169 (talk) 16:45, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The King of Barataria? --ColinFine (talk) 16:49, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Electric chair
I saw the execution of Ted Bundy on YouTube and there's a point in which he starts to bleed from the eyes. Why? does the electric chair make you bleed? Keeeith (talk) 15:56, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Bleeding most commonly occurs from biting the tongue or a nosebleed, both generally caused by improperly fastened straps or hoods. Can't say about eyes, but the body temperature increases to almost the boiling point internally (source) so it would not be very surprising that the small blood vessels in the eye could burst and bleed. — TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 16:47, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Since when is footage of executions made public? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:24, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm gonna take a guess that what he saw is what came up in a quick YouTube search: videos claiming to have things like the "real" execution of Saddam Hussein, etc., which have zero evidence to back up such claims. &mdash;  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 23:38, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Isn't that covered by the Freedom of Information Act? OsmanRF34 (talk) 23:39, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Highly unlikely. There's no constitutional right to see snuff films. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * But even if there were, that wouldn't mean they're all automatically uploaded onto youtube. "Freedom of Information" is one of those great misnomers: (a) the government decides what's available, and there are all manner of exceptions and exclusions; and (b) even when they do release stuff, it costs the applicant $$, sometimes a great deal. --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  01:58, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Right. From the logical standpoint, I can't imagine what argument could be made to compel the release of such a video, if it did exist. The guy was executed. How would Freedom of Information enter into it? To argue that he wasn't actually executed? I think not. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:04, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * To determine whether it violated the Eighth Amendment? I am not familiar with the ins and outs of FOIA but on the face of it this does not seem like an absurd argument.
 * Of course, as far as I'm aware, neither FOIA nor any other law requires that such a video have been made in the first place. My guess is that no such video was ever made. --Trovatore (talk) 03:03, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Presumably, that's part of the job of the witnesses - to verify that it was done, and done properly. I'd be surprised if they recorded it, but it's possible. If you think about it, crime scene photos generally aren't available to the public either. And I remain unconvinced that the OP has actually seen what he claims to have seen. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:26, 13 December 2012 (UTC)


 * How exactly are you so sure that crime-scene photos cannot be obtained through FOIA? It appears to be a very complex area of the law.  Are you an expert on this area? --Trovatore (talk) 04:00, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No, I'm applying logic and reason. I very much doubt you can use the FOIA to see something "just because you want to see it." I expect you'd have to demonstrate a "need to know". But I'd still like for the OP to address his claim of having seen such a video. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:21, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * How do logic and reason lead you to the conclusion that "crime scene photos generally aren't available to the public"? --Trovatore (talk) 04:22, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * How often do you see crime scene photos made available to the public? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Non sequitur. The question in context is whether they can be obtained through the use of FOIA. --Trovatore (talk) 04:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Why would the FOIA allow the release of confidential documents without a demonstrated "need to know"? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:29, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Because it's intended to promote government transparency. Now, whether it requires that this sort of thing be released, I don't know, but if it does, the reason why it does is obvious. --Trovatore (talk) 04:34, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * What's the public's "need to know" regarding seeing dead, mangled bodies? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:38, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * FOIA is not about need to know. FOIA is about transparency. --Trovatore (talk) 04:49, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * How does making gory photos available to the public have anything to do with "transparency" of the government? And what about the privacy rights of the relatives? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:21, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The idea behind FOIA is that, by default, the government doesn't get to have any secrets. It has to justify keeping secrets rather than the other way around. --Trovatore (talk) 06:07, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No, the idea behind the FOIA is that the government gets to pretend, via smoke and mirrors and classic redirection, that it doesn't keep secrets, by allowing people to get access to information that the government didn't really want to keep secret anyways. FOIA is to exposing secrets what the TSA is to airport security: it's a dog-and-pony show to placate the masses, but it doesn't actually do anything practical regarding the transparency of the government.  -- Jayron  32  06:11, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Very possible. Let me amend to "what's supposed to be the idea behind FOIA...". --Trovatore (talk) 06:12, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No, I think the people who wrote that law (being the gubmint itself) supposed it to be a dog-and-pony show from the first. What you as a citizen wish it were has little bearing on its actual raison d'être.  -- Jayron  32  06:16, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Crime scene photos are not "secrets". They are viewed by the judge, the attorneys and the jury. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:13, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Any information the government has, and won't share with you, is ipso facto a secret. --Trovatore (talk) 06:38, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I note in the freedom of information article that the government can withhold information if there is legal grounds to do so. In the case of snuff films and photos, they could easily argue that the victims' families' right to privacy is more important than some random citizen wanting to leer at such photos. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:54, 13 December 2012 (UTC)


 * (outdent) Did any of you guys bother looking up the footage on Youtube yourselves? It's not the real execution.  It's a dramatization. --Viennese Waltz 10:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The OP did not provide a link to it, but it's being a fake makes total sense. The question then becomes, was it based specifically on Bundy and the reports of witnesses? Or was it just generic with Bundy used as an example? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:51, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You should file an FOI request for the original and compare. :-) Matt Deres (talk) 17:11, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Why would it be recorded? Video recordings of executions are not made in the US. The one exception is that a judge had the execution of Robert Alton Harris recorded in the early 90s to determine whether the gas chamber constituted cruel and unusual punishment, but the tape ended up being destroyed before ever being viewed. Against the current (talk) 17:34, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Addendum: Take a look at Allen Lee Davis; this man's nose bled during his electrocution and this basically led to the end of the electric chair as Florida's means of capital punishment. Against the current (talk) 17:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You might say the state went "against the current". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:45, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Anybody bother to check the relevant law? The Federal Freedom of Information Act only applies to federal agencies, and so that's not relevant here. Florida has a FOI law Freedom of information legislation (Florida), but I don't know what it looked like in 1989 when he was executed, however the current law is at: Fla. Stat. § 119.01 et. seq. if someone's interested. Shadowjams (talk) 20:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Hillerman Navajo plot sequence
I wish to re-read Tony Hillerman's Navajo police mystery novels in plot sequence order, that is, I wish to have a list of those novels in which Hillerman's central characters, Leaphorn and Chee, are youngest in the first book on the list, and oldest in the last book on the list. EliotKalman (talk) 16:40, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I've not seen such a list, but I have seen a recommendation that this is a series in which reading them in publication order is to be preferred because of the way in which Hillerman developed the characters as he went along. Regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 16:56, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, and the OP has read them previously, and now wants to read them again the order he asks about. What value does your response provide the OP? --jpgordon:==( o ) 17:31, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I have read all of those books, and I believe that publication order corresponds to chronological order, although to the best of my recollection he never mentions specific years in the books. The main caveat is that he wrote three Leaphorn books before his first Chee book -- but Leaphorn is already quite old when he first appears together with Chee, so I don't think that really matters.  Note that our article onTony Hillerman gives a complete list of the Leaphorn/Chee novels. Looie496 (talk) 22:44, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

There's a mistake on Marshall McLuhan's page
His most famous book is, obviously, The Medium is the Message, and NOT The Medium is the Massage, as written on Wikipedia's page ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.202.228.161 (talk) 16:59, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia's The medium is the message article explains why you're mistaken. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 17:03, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Perhaps this entire exchange proves McLuhan's point? :) Wrad (talk) 21:14, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Kanee-Kabareea
I know sources that said the passage from page 43 about Kanee-Kabareea is by Captain James King, but how does anybody know which of the four authors wrote which part of A Voyage to the Pacific Ocean: Volume 2?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 17:47, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Also who was the author of page 164, the passage with "Kainee-Kabareea, and the wife of the Orono"?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 17:47, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * If you scroll up to the title page you will see the fine print that says Vol. I and II were written by James Cook and Vol. III by James King. Since your page 164 is in Vol. III, the author is King. The others are not authors, but captained various ships in the expedition. 184.147.123.169 (talk) 20:59, 12 December 2012 (UTC)