Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2013 August 3

= August 3 =

70s or 80s made for tv debate forum
It was sponsored by a university if I remember correctly but not Ivy League or the Stanfords of the world. It was on local PBS stations about a decade ago but even then they were reruns. About an hour long and they had a large room with almost stadium like seating but low ceilings and wood paneling circling the center where "experts" from the law professions, corporations, retired CEOs, noted journalists etc. sat at a circular table as a moderator went around and sort of stirred the pot. The episodes I remember was something about crime prevention and then another about corporate ethics where they had some memorable exchanges about an inventor founding a company and then investors and "wall street" kind of moving in and taking it over and even pushing the founder out. The room was lit in a dark way sort of like inverted wall lamps and had a 70s or early 80s feel to it. Any one remember this series?  Market St.⧏  ⧐ Diamond Way  04:40, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Might be Firing Line RudolfRed (talk) 04:57, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks RudolfRed, I am familiar with Buckley so I would have recognized him. The show I am thinking about showed the audience it was in a bowl seating type thing and the moderator actually walked around this crsecent moon shaped wood paneled table, I think even Rudy Guilianni was there and listed as US Attorney for S.D. NY so had to be late 80s or so.  The moderator was not Geraldo Rivera or Phil Donahue but kind of had the mannerisms of them walking constantly from area to area switching the debate up, looking down in pensive thought, sitting on the table in front of guests occassionally but no big microphone.  Almost certain he was a professor or aligned with a university so that rules out Buckley and Firing Line unless it was a guest host at a college lecture hall type series for 3-4 episodes.  I keep visualizing the dark wood paneling as the border between the audience and guests or perhaps the structure of the crescent moon table they were sitting at and the audience seating was dark wood/brown dimly lit.  Market St.⧏  ⧐ Diamond Way   07:39, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * This sounds a little like the TV pilot series for The Moral Maze that we had in the UK. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:33, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * The BBC made a series very like this called 'Hypotheticals' in the 1990s - the basis being that the people on the panel all had experience of real life situations which they couldn't disclose in public, but if they were given a hypothetical situation they could demonstrate how they would make their decisions. Sam Blacketer (talk) 10:50, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Been doing a bit of digging and I think this New York Times article is what you're thinking about. If so then the format was developed as a generic one and used for various shows. Sam Blacketer (talk) 10:58, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * That article is it Sam Blacketer! Fred Friendly's series thats what I'm thinking of though I can't seem to find the specific 80s one I had in mind I did pull up a list of them and I'm pretty sure this is the right track, seems a lot of them are still purchase only.  Kudos to you, and a big thanks!  Market St.⧏  ⧐ Diamond Way   11:35, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Identifying science fiction novel
I read a novel somewhere around 1980. Its protagonist was an ordinary human who because of a mix-up won a lottery where the prize was a journey through other dimensions. An important plot point is that because of the dangers in your own world, to keep the balance of things a new danger is created especially for you when you travel to another dimension. I think that was called an X-eater (with X as the protagonist's name) and was mostly somewhat humanoid in appearance. The protagonist travels through several dimensions, leaving each one when the X-eater gets too close. Somewhere he picks up a travel companion, a female. At the end of the book it's strongly hinted that he returns to his own dimension, but he keeps on travelling.

There's a scene at the beginning of the book when the lottery representative has come to present the prize and the real winner appears. At first he is very angry and intends to take the prize but then he changes his mind, apparently amused by the thought of having a human meet the dangers of interdimensional travel. It is shown that the real winner is more powerful than humans are; I think there was something about lead dripping from his fingertips as he became angry. Sjö (talk) 08:24, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I haven't read it (or even heard of it until now), but your description sounds a lot like Dimension of Miracles by the inimitable Robert Sheckley. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:37, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yep, that must be the one. Thanks! Sjö (talk) 10:09, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Detroit bankrupty --> Chapter 9 bankruptcies in general - Can anybody here help?
Hello, I posted a question at an article's talk page's section (please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chapter_9,_Title_11,_United_States_Code#Notable_Bankruptcies ) (but neither get an answer there, nor later at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_United_States#Can_anybody_here_help.3F, nor again later at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal_talk:United_States#Detroit_bankrupty_--.3E_Chapter_9_bankruptcies_in_general ). So I really hope that someone here finally could help me in finding out the names and data of the 600+ Chapter9bankruptcy-cases and so on. That would be nice, as I want to know it plus I really feel for that it's just a basic information missing from the (tabulary/list of the) Chapter9bankruptcies-article (how can the article contain the number 600+, if it is not able to give a source that not only mentions that number just by suggesting it but by really sourcing that suggestion by identifying that 600+ entries?). Thank you.46.142.39.141 (talk) 13:35, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Google scholar "legal" for the term chapter 9 bankruptcy here will answer most of this for you.  Market St.⧏  ⧐ Diamond Way  14:26, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That's interesting, but as there are only 82 hits and because of about half of them seem to consider companies, hospital associations, school districts, etc., it seems to me they're only about 40 city/community-chapter9-bankruptcy cases - and some of them are even on the "selected list" of the chapter9-wiki-article yet; so even if both combined, I think there still are more than 500 unidentified cases. Maybe all the data is not yet in the net? As I wrote in the article's talk page, I wonder whether there isn't some sort of a federal department section that collects/records such data and could provide us just with a list of them? As I'm not from the U.S., I'm not so into it to guess which section or who is best to ask, so I thought someone of you could have a clue about that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.142.39.141 (talk) 18:26, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes I see that now with the 82, the only thing that rivals Google scholar really is the Cornell Law school online library, if you don't mind paying some there is always WestLaw and you can go to the source I think for free to search of the U.S. Government's online court records but you will have to give a credit card to view cases and after so many views (a handful or something?) they will start charging you per page I think.  Market St.⧏  ⧐ Diamond Way  19:39, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Correct me if I'm wrong here but I thought when the article mentioned 600+ they meant all chapter 9's, including "authorities" or companies as you refer to them, hospital associations, school districts, etc. since all of these are technically government entities for the purposes of bankruptcy law.  I don't think there has been 600+ citys/counties/towns that have declared.  Part of the reason governments create authorities, school districts, hospital associations etc. is that they can raise their own bonds and be pretty much financially independent in that if Detroit goes bankrupt, its hospitals, schools and airport etc. don't and vice versa.  Pittsburgh had a situation about a decade ago where an airline de-hubbed its airport and thus cut landing fees and passenger fee revenue by a ton so the airport was actually close to defaulting on its bonds and bankruptcy was considered for a time but since the airport was an "independent" authority it would not effect the city or schools or health department etc.  It is quite common in the U.S. to have this kind of set up since the 1960's, the World Trade Centers in New York in the late 1960s were built with one of the first independent authorities to exist that was set up by New York state and New Jersey.  Long story short a lot of these "chapter 9"s I had taken as the water authority or school district or regional county trash authority or transit authority etc.  There are many famous cases of small and large cities going belly up but in 200 some years I seriously doubt there's anything approaching 600, but again I could be wrong about if that number only represents cities.  Market St.⧏  ⧐ Diamond Way   19:49, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

This is really easy:. As for the actual list, it might be harder but it's not super difficult. AFAIK Westlaw and Lexis are not the best places to find this kind of statistical data, but maybe they have some product I'm unaware of. But the aggregate data is easy to find. Shadowjams (talk) 21:24, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * There have been 59 Chapter 9 filings since 2008, btw. Shadowjams (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Are Americans allowed to eat their own food? Are raw foods available?
Hi,

I'm writing from Europe. I read this article via an internet link:

http://www.psmag.com/health/a-fatter-phobia-8549/

I don't understand some of it. For example, where the writer talks about the McDonald's and the sit-down restaurant. A couple of questions:

1 - Why does the author say the sit-down restaurant will have more Calories than McDonald's? Do American restaurants typically not have soups, salads, steaks, vegetables, etc etc. Every single menu item would be similar to mcdonald's?

2 - Do Americans not have a choice to eat their own food? I don't really understand this at all. I can go to a store here and buy whatever ingredients I want and cook whatever I want. If I wanted to eat almost no calories (which I don't recommend) I would just put vegetables in soup, or eat it with a salad with olives. That is one extreme, in between that and something very unhealthy (eating a whole batch of cookies) I can cook whatever I want. This doesn't seem to be an option in the article. Why is this?

3 - the article says "individuals ... believed that body weight was 'controllable' (meaning that, with discipline and time, a person can lose excess fat)".

This seems to me very bizarre. It seems completely obvious to me that I, and anyone, can control their body weight by changing the amounts of food eaten.

But the article seems to talk about this as though it's a false belief. The only way I can think of for this is if Americans do not have much choice in what they eat.

Is this true? How can it be?

I find the article very hard to understand. 178.48.114.143 (talk) 13:52, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It says at the top "You’re at the office, on a budget, it’s almost lunch time and — you’re starving." so only 1/2 hour or maybe hour which really only gives you 10-30 min to eat, its not that Americans can't cook or buy things from the store its that theres a reason America invented fast food, that reason of a quick in & out is the article's subject.  Market St.⧏  ⧐ Diamond Way  14:18, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * But why are you at the office without food, in this example, if a McDonald's will be the only option within your distance?  Can't Americans buy food ahead of time? 178.48.114.143 (talk) 16:36, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * American eating habits are often a source of culture shock. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 16:46, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Is it true at all that Americans are fatter than Europeans? Or is it a myth? And a further question. Why would be fast food be a calorie bomb or unhealthy? You could go to something fast, like a salad bar-type of restaurant. 95.20.116.138 (talk) 17:30, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Of course there are plenty of US restaurants offering healthier 'fast food', but the bombardment of advertising from the big chains may make it seem otherwise... Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 17:52, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

The article is clearly about those who eat certain foods from certain restaurants, if you re-read your title to this question it's pretty outlandish, like there is a possibility of no we aren't "allowed to eat" our own food and no there are "no raw foods available". This from a country that fed Europe in 1918 and 1945 and ships millions of tons of food to the world per year. The article is about those who eat certain foods from certain restaurants like an article about rainy days is about days that it rains not sunny days, or an article about Pittsburgh is about Pittsburgh and not Cleveland. I could google a million articles this instance that one could ask does that mean Cleveland is not allowed? Does that mean sunny days are not available? When writing an article like the one OP linked to the author doesn't have to preface it with every possible alternative in human history. A recent Modern Marvels cited that canned tuna is the #1 lunch item for Americans so obviously the article is about a minority of Americans. If you wish to raise a topic here at least be mindful of the Wikipedia pillar above policies of WP:COMMONSENSE. I think OP has some good questions but lets ease up on the vast general and absolute assumptions/inquires. Rainy day articles doesn't mean the sun doesn't exist or come out ever.  Market St.⧏  ⧐ Diamond Way  19:31, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * To respond to the "salad bar-type of restaurant" comment, we (speaking as an American) don't really have those. The closest that we have to that would be a grocery store that has salad items available to make your own salad.  But those are not nearly as prevalent as fast food restaurants.  And as for raw food, we have plenty.  I can even get raw milk around here. But then I live in a more rural area than many people.  It's not as easy to get in the bigger cities.  Dismas |(talk) 20:03, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * They're perhaps not as prevalent as they should be, but salad bar restaurants can be found in some parts of the US. Souplantations and Sweet Tomatoes are mostly in the South; I hadn't heard of Fresh Choice or Souper Salad, but they're linked from the Souplantation article. Seems ironic that these (relatively) healthy restaurants would be found mostly in such an unhealthy region, though. --BDD (talk) 20:45, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * What makes the South an "unhealthy region"? --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  21:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Higher obesity rates. Maybe it's something they ate. --BDD (talk) 21:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Being fat is almost always due to eating. HiLo48 (talk) 22:37, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * In the same way that people who breathe air almost always end up dying.  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  22:40, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe he's saying what and how much you eat can make you fat, in the same way that what and how much you breathe can kill you. In your own terms: people who become fat from eating become fat from eating certain foods, like too much McDonalds cheeseburgers, etc. etc.  in the same way that people can die from breathing the wrong stuff, like air laced with asbestos, or cigarette smoke.  -- Jayron  32  01:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Except it's rarely as simple as just the amount and type of food eaten. That's energy in.  There's also energy out, which typically comes from exercise.  I'm generalising, but people with weight issues usually need to redress the imbalance by (a) modifying their eating, AND (b) doing more exercise than they currently do, which for many people means doing some exercise instead of virtually none at all.  Just talking about the food side of this equation is crazy.  It's like saying the only exercise one ever needs to do is urination, defecation and sweating.  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  04:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, isn't the above completely obvious? How can this be a discussion. Do some people not realize that being fat is indicative only of overeating? (and medical issues which 'cause overeating'). I guess 0.2% of the population might eat less calories than they consume and somehow still gain weight but then again 0.2% of the population can subsist on sunshine alone too by that same token. It seems I've stumbled on some deeply ingrained marketing message, or something. I don't know what exactly. Could someone elaborate? How are the above posters debating the obvious, for example? 178.48.114.143 (talk) 03:31, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, what is your question you need help answering again? I'm having trouble telling if you are asking a genuine question in need of references to answer, or if you're trying to make some grand provocative statement but to mask your attempt at soapboxing by putting question marks rather than periods at the end of your sentences.  Perhaps you could ask a simple question we could point you to answers to.  -- Jayron  32  03:41, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed Jayron32, see my 2nd post above for further reference. <sup style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;"> Market St.⧏ <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;"> ⧐ Diamond Way  08:07, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * To those who think that obesity is merely a question of how much food you eat, this article in today's Observer might help you understand why it's a question of what's in the food you eat rather than how much. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:02, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * See my comment above at 4:47, Tammy. --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  10:04, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

A spin-off question on the cultural differences between Europe and the US: At practically every workplace I ever worked in Sweden there was a lunch room (or fika room) where you could sit down and eat food you've taken with you. They had a fridge, one or more microwaves and a coffee maker, all supplied by the employer. Are these unusual in the US? The article in the OP seems to suggest that your only option is to leave the office and go to a restaurant, and I can't recall any American movies or TV series where people eat in a lunch room (sometimes they eat in the cafeteria, but that's not the same thing as a lunch room). Sjö (talk) 07:11, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It often depends on the size of the business. From my experience, there's not a lot of "let's all eat together" camaraderie unless there is a group heading out to eat.  I've worked for four companies.  (The following assumes that the worker didn't go out to eat.)  The first had a break room for the workers on the factory floor but the office staff didn't eat there for various reasons both practical and cultural.  Most all the office staff ate at their desks though there was a conference table in a common area which could have been used.  The second only had a five office employees. Office workers ate at their desk, those in the machine shop ate at a makeshift table in the shop.  No conference room available.  The third had a public kitchen/breakroom but it was often closed due for a customer's use (kid's birthday parties, we sold teddy bears).  And the last has a full fledged cafeteria that operates during the day (technically the largest restaurant in the state, from what I'm told).  Office workers here at night either eat at their desk or in a breakroom.  I couldn't find anything approaching a reliable source for this but what I've described seems to cover most situations here in the US.  Most of the search results that I found seem to verify that, if not eating out, American office workers eat at their desks.  Dismas |(talk) 08:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * What's the difference between a cafeteria and a lunch room? It's not as if you can't eat food from home in a cafeteria.  In fact, that's what some of my coworkers do every day.  --50.125.66.85 (talk) 18:54, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * A cafeteria would have staff that prepare food for you, probably not employed directly by the company that has the cafeteria in the building. Like at a school.  A lunch room may just have some tables or it may have things like a refrigerator, sink, microwave, and vending machines.  Dismas |(talk) 19:28, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It varies depending on region. In some parts of the States, cafeteria & lunch room are synonymous terms for larger area where food has been prepared, you pick the items you want from the available dishes, pay & then go into the main dining area (which is typically large with multiple long tables). In others, a lunch room is just a small room with maybe a fridge & a microwave, plus a table & chairs to eat at; while cafeteria refers to the larger service-line area. &mdash;  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 21:04, 6 August 2013 (UTC)


 * To go back to the original question: Americans tend to work longer hours & have fewer vacation days than in Europe. This has led to a culture of convenience, where it's more important to have meals be fast & easily obtained than for them to be healthy. Preparing food at home takes out of what leisure time we have, and typically we favor foods that are pre-made (frozen & reheatable) or just to eat out. &mdash;  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 21:04, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

User interface design and cultural differences
There exist some potentially non-obvious/ambiguous user interfaces. Some examples:
 * 1) volume knob on an amplifier increases volume if turned clockwise (why not counter-clockwise?)
 * 2) scrolling in (horizontal or vertical) menus using the rotation of a knob (who says clockwise means up?)
 * 3) using left/right arrows to navigate up/down (e.g. k9-mail which is always confusing me)

Perhaps there are more examples. I was wondering whether all of such interfaces are supposed to be natural for all users or whether there are perhaps differences between left/right-handed people, people writing from left-to-right/right-to-left, people driving on the left/right side of the street, or just people from different cultures? Also, is "what feels natural" only a question of getting used to or are there perhaps some physiological things playing a role as well? bamse (talk) 14:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * For 1 and 2, clock faces are numbered 1 to 12 in a clockwise direction (because the rotation of the Earth causes shadows to rotate clockwise in the northern hemisphere), so things other than time are taken to increase in the clockwise direction. For 2, combine this with the mathematical convention (perhaps based on rungs of a ladder) where positive is taken as up.  If measurement of time and clocks had been developed in the southern hemisphere, then things might have been different.  (In some branches of Mathematics, positive angles are measured in an anticlockwise direction.  It's all just convention.)   I don't know what you mean by 3, but perhaps someone else does?  Is it just that right and up are both taken as the positive directions?    D b f i r s   18:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * A good book on this topic is -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:34, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Interesting point about the clock. Thanks. I noticed "3" with the k9 email client, but it could also appear in other places. In k9 as in many other email clients you have the emails ordered in a list, line by line. If I go to the view of a single email, I can switch to previous/next using left/right arrow buttons. bamse (talk) 22:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I am an older person. I recall the earliest media player software. It had similar controls to much other software at the time. Nor problem for me. Then came "skins". They were completely different, with controls that were different from software in any other field. They were apparently meant to appeal to the target teenage of the time. No idea if they did. I couldn't figure them out. Then these (to me) weird controls became standard. I had no choice. Annoyed the crap out of me. HiLo48 (talk) 22:42, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Not just you, see this classic hallofshame Quicktime review. Didn't stop them, though. Unilynx (talk) 13:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

narrative aorist - ancient greek
I read that aorsit can be use as narrative aorist. I did not understand very well the explanation. Somebody can bring another example? From what I read narrative aorist describes an action that is a part of a long action - e.g I walk ; if I want to describes the step, I would be use narrative aorist? --132.64.30.55 (talk) 15:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This question would be more likely to get an answer on the Language desk. Looie496 (talk) 22:55, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Basically, "narrative aorist" means just those uses of the aorist where it corresponds to an English simple past tense. Sequences of events in a narrative (as in "he got up, had breakfast, and then went to work") are the most typical kind of context for this. This type of use can be distinguished from some other, more marginal types of uses of the aorist where the English translation would be in a different tense (such as the "gnomic aorist") on the one hand, and from past tense situations where Greek would use the imperfect and English would use a past progressive (as in "John was reading the newspaper when suddenly the telephone rang") on the other hand. (But I agree that the Language desk would probably be a better forum for continuing this, if you have more questions.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:06, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Countries where Jews outnumber Muslims
I was interested to learn that in Monaco, Jews outnumber Muslims, and wondered in what other countries that is the case. Israel, of course, and the US, though I note it's not the case in Canada or the UK. This isn't surprising, given the religions' very different ideas on proselytization. Still, in what other countries do Jews outnumber Muslims? Do any US states have more Muslims than Jews. I would've thought Michigan, though our article says both religions made up 1% of that state's population in 2007. I also wonder how these surveys determine who is a Jew. Probably self-identification, but if these questions are phrased in terms of religion, atheist Jews may not be counted as Jews. --BDD (talk) 20:38, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * What about atheist Muslims? HiLo48 (talk) 22:09, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that's a contradiction. According to us, a Muslim "is an adherent of Islam," which precludes atheism. While someone born into a Muslim family can certainly be an atheist, I don't think there's anything you can directly compare to Jewish atheism. --BDD (talk) 22:34, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm well aware of that. Maybe I was too subtle. It's your question. What exactly are you comparing? Surely it can really only be religious beliefs. Otherwise there's no point to a comparison. HiLo48 (talk) 23:08, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * According to the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies and this report, Islam is the largest non-Christian group in 20 American states, mostly in the South and Midwest: Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, North Carolina Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota and Wyoming. I assume that Jews are the largest non-Christian group in most other American states, although there may be a few states in which Buddhists or another non-Christian group come in second.  John M Baker (talk) 22:44, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * A relevant concept is not "atheism" regarding the individual Jew or Moslem's belief, but whether or not they are affiliated with a congregation (synagogue/temple, mosque). How was this taken into account in the abovementioned survey? There are individuals who adhere to and identify with some of the tenets of either religion without attending worship services or paying dues to an organization. There are many self-identified Jews in America (and Israel, where I now live) of this sort; I'm not familiar with Muslim practice in the USA. Bearing in mind that much of both these religions involves codes of personal and interpersonal behavior and cultural practices - I vary from User:HiLo48's point above but agree that it would help if the OP would clarify whether religious affiliation vs. practice and self-identification are the query here.-- Deborahjay (talk) 05:48, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * According to the report: "The researchers define adherents to be those with an affiliation to a congregation including children, members and attendees who are not members, and believe that the adherent measure is the most complete and comparable across religious groups. Congregations are defined as groups of people who meet regularly at a pre-announced time and location."  This would undercount the number of persons who identify as Jews, and to a lesser extent those who identify as Muslims.  John M Baker (talk) 15:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It would appear that the Jewish population of Brazil is larger than the Muslim population of that country, see Religion in Brazil. Latvia is another contender, although its so close as to be subject to the error margin of the census. Religion in Latvia. Thom2002 (talk) 20:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Paraguay appears to be another example. Warofdreams talk 12:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Chile as well. (see List of Chilean Jews and Islam in Chile) D Monack (talk) 03:06, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * And Mexico. --D Monack (talk) 03:08, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Titles Deprivation Act 1917
The title Titles Deprivation Act 1917 took away the titles for four Germans with British peer like the Duke of Cumberland and the Duke Albany but their heirs are allowed to petition for restoration of these titles. But does it mean that these titles can't be recreate it for another individual? Can Elizabeth II or parliament create Prince George as the Duke of Albany while the male heirs of Prince Leopold are still alive. --The Emperor&#39;s New Spy (talk) 21:49, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * If the rightful Duke under British law was Friedrich Josias Carl Eduard Kyrill Harald, Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (1918-1998), there is the slight matter of him having borne arms against his cousin King George VI. According to de.wikipedia, after joining the German Army as an officer cadet in 1938, he served in the illegal invasions of Czechoslovakia, Poland, France, Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. Returning to occupied France, he was then posted to occupied Denmark and in 1945 became a prisoner of the British. --Hors-la-loi 19:26, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * They aren't "rightful" dukes because their titles were taken away from them. There wasn't a second deprivation for involvement in WWII. Friedrich Josias didn't inherit his father's claim to Albany only his Saxon claim, his brother Johann Leopold inherited Charles Edward's claim since British law doesn't prohibit morganatic marriages. And your answer doesn't answer if the titles can be recreated for another individual ignoring the right all these individuals have to petition to have their titles restored,--The Emperor&#39;s New Spy (talk) 19:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * There is nothing legally stopping a duplicate title being created - technically the Queen could create as many Dukes of Albany as she liked. In practice, however, she wouldn't create a duplicate title, and a suspended title would nowadays undoubtedly be treated in the same way as an existing title. It seems, however, that the Dukedom of Albany must be extinct in any event - the Saxe-Coburgs stopped applying for permission to marry under the Royal Marriages Act 1772, and so the current members of the male line are all illegitimate under British law and thus ineligible to succeed. (The Dukes of Cumberland and Teviotdale continued to do so, so that title is still extant but suspended, and so for all practical purposes unavailable for regrant.) Proteus (Talk) 12:41, 7 August 2013 (UTC)