Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2013 January 20

= January 20 =

Searching for origin of quote about armies going to war over pieces of land not big enough to bury the dead
I could swear that I remember some quote about WWI (or WWWII) that armies or nations would go to war over pieces of land not big enough to bury the dead in. Does anyone know the exact quote or who said it? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 04:09, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know who exactly said it (other than the fact that it was a Russian general), but the exact quote was: "We have taken just enough Finnish territory to bury our dead". BTW, that was about the Winter War. 24.23.196.85 (talk) 06:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I imagine the exact quote was in Russian, so translations will likely vary quite a bit. For what it's worth, Colin Powell made a similar statement regarding America's role in the War on Terror, but I doubt that's what you were referring to. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 06:12, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * TOTALLY FALSE -- what he said was "the only land we ever asked for was enough land to bury our dead", which has a COMPLETELY different meaning from the above! 24.23.196.85 (talk) 06:31, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Calm down, there's no need to shout. I meant that the "land enough to bury" comparison was similar, not that the context and meaning of the two were identical. One could easily misremember the statement, so I figured I would throw it out there to see if the OP may have done just that. For the record, the exact quote was "Far from being the Great Satan, I would say that we are the Great Protector. ... the only land we ever asked for was enough land to bury our dead. And that is the kind of nation we are." /digression Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 06:39, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I am reminded of Hamlet, Act IV, Scene IV:
 * ...[W]hile to my shame I see
 * The imminent death of twenty thousand men
 * That for a fantasy and trick of fame
 * Go to their graves like beds, fight for a plot
 * Whereon the numbers cannot try the cause,
 * Which is not tomb enough and continent
 * To hide the slain...
 * Helene O&#39;Troy - Et In Arcadia Ego Sum (talk) 21:09, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

What kind of Fiat?
Is ? Kittybrewster  &#9742;  16:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This was rather tricky to track down, but I think I've got it. I believe this is a Fiat Tipo 2, or possibly an early Fiat Tipo 2B. Compare your image with this, of a 1911 Tipo 2. Unfortunately, I can't really be completely certain, since there are some inconsistencies between the car in you picture and the picture of a Tipo 2. However, this is somewhat expected, since it was much easier in those days for owners to drop a new body onto the chassis, resulting in a much wider range of body styles than today.
 * Assuming that it is a Tipo 2, the car is almost certainly immediately pre-war. The 2 was only made during 1910 and '11, with the 2B taking over in 1912. We have a brief article on the 2B, but there is a longer article on the Italian Wikipedia, covering both the 2 and 2B. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 20:17, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought the 1912 Fiat Zero was a possibility maybe too nonsense  ferret  22:05, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, so did I. To be honest, this really could be any Fiat built between 1910 and 1925. What tipped me towards the Tipo 2 was the shape of the bodywork to the rear of the driver, although I now notice that the shape of the front mudguards/wheel arches is different between the picture I found and Kitty's. Also there is a windscreen fitted, with a tilting mechanism, which there isn't on the Tipo 2 in our picture, although there is a a windscreen (albeit with no visible mechanism) in our Fiat Zero article.
 * Like I said, I believe that car bodywork of the period was liable to vary almost from owner to owner, and having a custom-coach built car much more common then than now. Nonetheless, I wonder if it really is a Fiat, since I've found it impossible to find any pictures that match Kitty's. To be honest I think I lack expertise in this area - maybe you could find someone more knowledgeable in veteran vintage Fiats through the Veteran Car Club of Great Britain. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 22:54, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Economic value of a phd
I was talking to someone not long back, and he told me that a PhD was worth less in the market than a basic degree. I told him I wasn't surprised, because you do something rather esoteric, and it can be a delaying tactic as much as anything. Then my supervisor told me there was a strong correlation between your educational level and your income, even with higher degrees and PhDs. The "anti" guy was in oil and gas engineering, and had apparently got most of his skills on the job, so both sides could probably be said to be arguing for their own position in the market. Does anyone know anything up to date and reasonably reliable on this one? I'm sure it would make a difference whether one is talking about vocational areas or pure ones (I'm in IT, so my first interest is on the vocational side, but I'm curious about all areas separately, and then also about all of them taken jointly). Thanks in advance, IBE (talk) 16:25, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The figures you're looking for are known as the "rate of return" or "return on investment". It will depend a lot on what country you study in and what country you are seeking employment in, your gender, your age, and whether you will be looking for academic or private sector work after graduating. I found http://www.oecd.org/social/labourmarketshumancapitalandinequality/37578152.pdf this paper for Canada, very old figures. So old they don't even seem to have IT courses as a category. This report for Britain http://www.esrc.ac.uk/_images/career-choices-and-impact-on-graduates-report_tcm8-6388.pdf, if you scroll down to Table 14, bundles Computing with Maths and shows a non-significant rate of return for men, a fairly high rate for women. All the studies stress how difficult the rates are to calculate and how many things they depend on. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I recently saw a study about entry level incomes for PhDs vs. Master employees at a large German chemical manufacturer. PhDs made about EUR 500 more per month, or something between 5 and 10%. If it pays for the 3-5 years typically spend on a PhD is doubtful, especially since your cost is before tax, but net income is after tax (which, depending on family income, would be somewhere around 40% on that extra EUR 500 in Germany). But then you shouldn't get a PhD for the money, but because you like science and want to learn more. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 17:03, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * For me it's more about being in my 40s and having a mid-life crisis ;) IBE (talk) 17:22, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * As good a reason as any. It'll drive you into science... ;-) --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I saw figures not long ago (I can't recall where) which basically said that in the U.S., on average, a bachelor's degree gives you a significant lifetime earnings increase over no college degree; a master's degree gives you a significant increase over a bachelor's; and a Ph.D. gives you almost no increase at all over a master's. This is not to say that Ph.D. jobs often do not pay more than master's degree jobs, but the opportunity costs for a Ph.D. are much higher than a master's in the US. (In the UK I don't think it is quite the same as they have much shorter Ph.D. periods than the U.S.) But it varies greatly by field; a humanities Ph.D. (English being the lowest of these in terms of economic value) qualifies you to teach in a university but almost nothing else (and in fact may make it very hard to get any job other than a university position), and most university jobs are not very high-paying. An engineering or math Ph.D. often does come with quite a salary increase, if I recall, in the private sector (and, for that reason, in universities that are trying to be competitive). Between those two poles there was a lot of variation. These are unsourced assertions of mine at the moment, memories of articles once read, but such numbers have been floating around for awhile in places like the Chronicle for Higher Education. (It should probably be noted that many higher degrees in the humanities do not require you to pay tuition, in part because there is so little expectation of paying them off later. There are still other real and opportunity costs, of course.) --Mr.98 (talk) 17:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It is certainly proverbial that a PhD in postmodern literature, or the economics of 14th century agriculture, will make you almost unemployable. But don't people in practice just leave this off their CVs when applying at eg. McDonalds? Or is it just too hard to explain the lost time to a potential employer (as in "Well, Mr. Foucault, what exactly were you doing for the years xxxx to xxxx? Cleaning offices 2 nights a week doesn't sound like much..")? IBE (talk) 17:19, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Entirely anecdotally, I have heard people with said degrees (usually in the last year or so of grad school, trying desperately to get a job) wonder and gripe about this. The problem is that for people who have gone that career route, they rarely have any work experience worth putting on a C.V. by the time they get to that stage. "Yeah, I worked at a book store when I was an undergraduate. And then I fell off the face of the Earth for 8 or 9 years and have nothing to show for it." It is not just postmodern literature or 14th century agriculture; almost no humanities degrees these days are tailored to practical problems and almost all sound completely esoteric to people who are unfamiliar with the subject matter. The very presence of a fancy-sounding Ph.D. makes most of the employers think you are overqualified for any entry-level job, while being completely under-qualified for anything higher than that. Plus all of the (sometimes justified) prejudices about how people with Ph.D.s regard themselves, regard others, and so forth. There isn't any good answer to the question that I've seen, except encouraging people to just get master's degrees if they can imagine themselves do anything other than trying to teach at a third-rate college in the middle of nowhere. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:05, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Not legal advice, but I wouldn't assume that it is legal to leave qualifications off your CV. It could be seen as misrepresentation. Itsmejudith (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You may be quite right, but there is a difference between what may be nominally illegal and what is worth an employer's time. In Australia, you frequently see the warning that giving false information on a CV is grounds for dismissal - that doesn't mean you must disclose everything, and there is no practical risk of ending up in court. They might ask you about further qualifications in the interview, and then you may be caught - there may be no paper trail showing that you lied, but still you did misrepresent yourself. Somewhat tricky, because you are being asked to cheat yourself out of a job, thus joining the dole queue, and making the prospective employer pay for you anyway. In practice, you will only get fired for it, at worst. IBE (talk) 17:59, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Judith, it may be different where you are, but I would say that in general there is no offence in understating one's accomplishments and qualifications. In my last job I was always advising clients to tailor their CVs and applications for the job they were going for, and that ipso facto means that the CV you present on one occasion is in some way different from the one you present on another occasion, and that usually means you're leaving something off on one of those occasions, whether it be qualifications or experience or whatever.  That's simply keeping it relevant, and thus enhancing your chances of staying in the race.  It's only when one overstates the situation that one can get into trouble.  One would do this by claiming qualifications or experience that one simply does not have.  I'm sure it goes on, but I never advised my clients to do that.  --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  18:46, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sure it depends on the jurisdiction and there are different cultures too. I agree that it's normal tailor CVs and bring out one aspect more than another. Leaving whole major qualifications off may not necessarily be OK. Certainly if an employer says that you must disclose everything then you must. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * If it's as clear cut as "major qualifications", you may have a point. But even in that case, while the company may have cause to sack you or not hire you in the first place, if they discover you have failed to disclose your PhD in Advanced Ancient Bureaucratic Paper-Shuffling, under no circumstances could it ever become a police matter.  There's no law against showing humility and not boasting.   --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  19:19, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * "...I'm sure it goes on..." I hear it happens rather a lot. I met someone who (afaicr) said she spoke French to work as a nurse in a French-speaking hospital. She picked it up pretty soon on the job. I am always amused by the similarity between applying for a job, promoting a product in a sales job, and promoting oneself to potential romantic partners. "Oh yes, I'm under 30, wealthy, with only useful qualifications, I would make a great parent, .. and, did I mention I have a good sense of humour?" IBE (talk) 18:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * One of my grad school professors joked that the academic job hunt was just like dating. That sounds pretty terrifying to me. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)


 * This is in the press a lot, and sources abound, so I am confused no one has linked the available estimates.
 * There's a lot of interest in it, and a lot of press articles, but there's a shortage of reliable research that breaks the return down into different academic subjects or occupational sectors. The main reason for this is that a proper research study involves contacting people several years after they have graduated and them being willing to disclose their salaries. This is an expensive methodology. You need to start off with a large base in order to cope with the fact that some people will be hard to contact or will decline to take part. If the results are to be meaningful when broken down by sector and by gender, you need an even larger base. And not many people do PhDs. There is likely to be a selection bias, in that the PhD graduates who have had successful careers and earn good salaries are easier to contact and more likely to want to take part than those who never used their PhD and are struggling in routine occupations. Itsmejudith (talk) 09:29, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Certainly economists make a lot more with a PhD than with a master's. The article computer scientist links to this site, which says that in 2010 the median pay for Computer and Information Research Scientists (PhD required) was $$100,660. Duoduoduo (talk) 16:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Crime and otakus in Japan
Hi, I am from Japan and there have been a series of crimes involving otaku young adults that has created a social phobia against us. Not so long ago a 20-year old fan of an anime series killed his parents and a neighbor with a knife and killed himself and the media criticized the series. There have also been notorious serial killers involving otakus and such. My question is, is there any possible relation between otaku and murder? Kotjap (talk) 20:43, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you give us any links to what you are talking about? μηδείς (talk) 20:56, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Yukio Yamaji, Tsutomu Miyazaki, Hiroaki Hidaka, Hiroyuki Tsuchida. All of them otakus. Kotjap (talk) 21:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The relevant article is otaku. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:09, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Is there any firm evidence to suggest that the phenomena described by Japanese terms like otaku and hikikomori are actually more common or significant in Japan than elsewhere? AlexTiefling (talk) 10:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I would not say all Otaku are Hikikomori. I worked in Japan as a counsellor for adults and children, and many were 'futoukou' (kids who would refuse to go to school, for whatever reason that we had to find out). It happens also here in England. I doubt there is much of a difference in the statistics, except in England the kids have to go to school, otherwise the parents will be put in prison, so they are forced to. I have a couple of friends here in England who were beaten up late at night, and they will not leave the house. It happens everywhere, though I have no firm evidence for this.  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  13:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I've got blisters on my fingers
There was a question on the Miscellaneous Desk about the difference between steel and nylon guitar strings, which brought to mind the line "I've got blisters on my fingers." Googling it for the meaning, I found our article Helter Skelter (song), which explained many things, including that a helter skelter is a type of amusement ride in Britain--which I had never heard of.

Even more surprising was to learn that this was a Paul McCartney song.

I had always assumed it was by Lennon, whom I always assumed was the most brilliant Beatle. But I have come more and more to believe the pretty one was the best of the bunch, and listening to this extended version of Helter Skelter has been a revelation. I have three questions. (1) Is there a definitive published version of such recordings as the one I just linked to, and, if not, is there any known bootleg title? (2) Is there a highly regarded biography of the Beatles as a group? And, (3) Is there any notable critical commentary comparing McCartney versus Lennon (as well, perhaps, as Harrison and Starr)? Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 20:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * A more or less definitive publication on all the recordings is The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions by Mark Lewisohn. It does list some alternate versions (the sorts of things that appeared on the Anthologies, although it was published before that), but it's mostly about the official recorded versions. There are tons of bootlegs though...I'm sure things have been written about them, but I don't know what. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:45, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * All [all? I meant I've] always been surprised that it was Ringo who shouted the blisters line, not any of the guitar players. The Beatles are full of surprises. Mingmingla (talk) 00:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Apparently, Ringo was beating the shit out of his drums, and the song took so many takes to get right that, on the last take, he shouted the famous line as he really did hit the drums so hard and so much that he got blisters on his fingers. -- Jayron  32  23:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Revolution in the Head: The Beatles' Records and the Sixties by Ian MacDonald provides a critical commentary on each individual song. It's a long time since I read it, but it would certainly go some way to covering your point 3 and is a worthwhile read for anyone with reasonable familiarity with the Beatles' output. Hunter Davies wrote the authorised biography and that is detailed and, as I recall, not too sanitised or corporate despite being authorised, though I read it 25 years ago and I'm not familiar with more recent editions. I also read Philip Norman's Shout! - again many years ago - which was also, I understand, generally well-received, though skimming through reviews on Amazon now I notice that several readers allude to it ascribing to the "John was better than Paul" theory, so it may not be the ideal one for you. We have a Category:Books about the Beatles, but no articles on either of the biographies I mention (which seems like an omission). Valiantis (talk) 01:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It's about 30 years old now, but it's not like there's been a whole lot of band history since then, I always liked The Compleat Beatles as a documentary film about The Beatles. It covers their life as a band through the Cavern and Hamburg years until they broke up in 1970.  -- Jayron  32  13:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Just curious - if the term "helter skelter" is unknown in the US, why did Don McLean include it in American Pie (song)? Was he just looking for a rhyme for "summer swelter"? Alansplodge (talk) 16:27, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The term isn't unknown in the US; it's just not used to refer to an amusement park ride. Instead it has the colloquial meaning of "haphazard or disorganized; in disarray". Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 16:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hence the connection to Charles Manson and his evil doings. --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  19:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. It seems that meaning is much earlier than the slide. Thanks. Alansplodge (talk) 19:38, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I finally understand the line when I get to the bottom I go back to the top of the slide. I'm pretty sure "all this way and that" is the original meaning of helter-skelter; the meaning in the sense of a slide seems to be a later innovation. --Trovatore (talk) 19:40, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, Etymology Online (linked above) gives first use as an adverb in the 1590s and as a adjective "from 1785". The slide has a late 19th century look about it. Alansplodge (talk) 13:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Aha! "Originating in America with the famous Coney Island park, the term helter-skelter is first recorded in the UK in 1906 at Blackpool Pleasure Beach." Alansplodge (talk) 14:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * My favourite book of the Beatles is The Beatles Anthology, which is essentially a collection of their words from various interviews stitched together. A very similar book was done for Monty Python and it, too, is the best of its kind I've read.
 * The version of Helter Skelter you linked to appears to be a slightly truncated version of the track recorded on 18-7-1968 and often referred to as simply "Take 2" or "Helter Skelter Take 2" or some variation thereof with the date. The longest version I have is 11:55 long, while the YouTube video is only 10:10 and when it was eventually released on the Anthology 3 disc it had been cut down to a mere 4:37.
 * As with Led Zeppelin, the cataloging of Beatles bootlegs is an enormous undertaking; our article just scratches the surface - this should give you an idea of the volume. Now, if you're interested in the particular track you linked to, the bootleg disc called Most Wanted Tracks Raccoon Records is at least one possibility; I downloaded a FLAC version a few years ago off of usenet, though I imagine it's to be found elsewhere. Besides a couple of versions of Helter Skelter (but not, alas, the long fabled 27 minute version), it also has alternate versions of Penny Lane, I am the Walrus, and a few others. Matt Deres (talk) 02:42, 22 January 2013 (UTC)


 * As for comparison McCartney and Lennon, I'm not aware of anything published on those lines, but my own opinion is that each was better for having the other to compete with. Neither of them has written nearly as many great songs solo (or with Wings of the Plastic Ono Band) as they did while they were in the Beatles. --Nicknack009 (talk) 13:46, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Percentage of disabled people in the UK accessing the countryside annually
Hi I'm doing a masters in Horticulture and am working on a module regarding access for the disabled to the UK countryside.My question is How many disabled people in the UK access the countryside annually ,so far I have tried all the disabled web sites I can manage to find re countryside access, HM Gov, and the office for statistics and have come to a dead end .Does anyone have this figure as I find it incredible that to enhance access for this portion of our society we first need to know how many do actually access it in the first place. There are stats for the number of disabled in the UK How many have mobility issues ,How many are registered blind,deaf but not 1 figure for accessing the countryside

Please help

Many Thanks

P Bailey — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.6.20.245 (talk) 22:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Please clarify/define what "access the countryside" means. Without a precise definition it is impossible to even try answering your question. Roger (talk) 22:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how you expect this information to be gathered. I seriously hope that our society isn't that closely monitored by the powers-that-be. Alansplodge (talk) 23:21, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Under the Equality Act 2010 - which reconciles various earlier anti-discrimination legislation - public authorities have a an "equality duty" and "must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to — (a)eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act; (b)advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; (c)foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it." Disability is one of the "protected characteristics". What this means in practice is that public authorities (government departments, local councils, National Parks Authorities etc.)  must take steps towards making their services available to people with disabilities on equal footing with the able-bodied. As significant areas of "the countryside" fall under the control of public authorities, or if the land itself does not, then facilities such as visitor centres, car parks at beauty spots etc. do, then this means many public authorities have some legal requirement to be able to show they are meeting their responsibilities under the act. It's therefore likely that they will keep statistics re: users or visitors, what proportion have disabilities, and what proportion were able to access the facilities. I wouldn't imagine this would be on a census basis (i.e. every visitor to a site is asked "Do you have a disability?", "Did you find the facilities adapted to your disability?"), but may well be on a survey basis (e.g. once a month all visitors are asked "Do you have 5 minutes to answer a survey?"). So there are probably some stats out there. However, each public authority will keep its own stats for its own purposes, the stats won't necessarily be comparable as they won't be centrally defined, and they may not be actively made available to the general public (although they would generally be accessible by means of a Freedom of Information request). Unless there's an academic who has already compiled statistics from multiple sources (and your tutor should be able to assist you with this), gathering this information strikes me as likely to be a significant piece of research in itself. Valiantis (talk) 02:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Just as an addendum to my previous post - as I was curious if anybody did know the answer to the OP's question - I did a little googling. Increasing access to the countryside by people in minority groups was one of the aims set out in the government's 2000 White Paper "Our Countryside: the future" . "By 2005, we will carry out a full diversity review of how we can encourage more people with disabilities, more people from the ethnic minorities, more people from the inner cities, and more young people to visit the countryside and participate in country activities." Reading between the lines, they didn't actually know whether such people were visiting the countryside in large numbers or not, but thought they probably weren't (and this is how government policy gets made...). The Diversity Review that was carried out by Natural England concludes there is "strong anecdotal evidence of under-participation" by minority groups including people with disabilities and that there is "a significant lack of good baseline information regarding the level and nature of participation in countryside activities by under-represented groups". I conclude there are no centrally-held hard facts, which is a lacuna that is of interest in itself. Valiantis (talk) 02:59, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * There are special interest groups you could ask: Accessible Countryside for Everyone for example. (Of course you could be working for them already in which case I apologise.) I have a Twitter contact who may be able to help with your research, if you'd like to contact me on my talk page. A web search on "disabled access to countryside" brought up many useful links: it seems that support (and probably therefore statistics) for disabled people to access countryside is organised at a county level, and you may need to contact relevant counties. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:09, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * By the way - this looks like a topic that would be of great interest to WP:WikiProject Disability. I don't think we have any relevant articles yet. Roger (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * There is a research base on this, will see what I can find. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This presentation http://geography.lancs.ac.uk/envjustice/eiseminars/downloads/Edin_Stearn.ppt but I am looking for something with a literature review. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02614360903071704 is qualitative but should be of interest. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Bank of Montreal questions
What are the investment products and mortgage products of Bank of Montreal? Thanks. --Donmust90 (talk) 23:52, 20 January 2013 (UTC)Donmust90


 * I'd start here at the BMO website: Bielle (talk) 23:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)