Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2015 May 13

= May 13 =

Iranian reactions to the Andijan massacre?
Does anyone have any information about the reaction of the Iranian government (if any) after the Andijan massacre? What kind of relations were/are there between Iran and Uzbekistan before/after? Did the Andijan massacre change anything regarding those relations? Thanks. Contact Basemetal   here  00:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * It was mentioned as a bloody massacre in the press, but it didn't change anything in moderate relations between the two governments. Omidinist (talk) 03:31, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * So reactions in the Iranian press but no official reactions at all? Do I understand this right? In 2009 the Iranian government called for international sanctions against Germany when one Muslim Egyptian (!) woman was murdered in a Dresden courtroom by a psycho who had nothing whatsoever to do with the German government. Has anyone seen anywhere an explanation for the apparent inconsistency? What "algorithm" does the Iranian government use to decide when to react and when not to to the killing of Muslims? Contact Basemetal   here  13:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, please. As if Western governments did not apply all kinds of double standards based on their material, strategic, or ideological interests.  For example, Western governments tend to be much more vocal about violations of human rights in Iran than in Saudi Arabia.  Marco polo (talk) 13:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No kidding? My question was not about a comparison between various inconsistent behaviors but about how things work in Iran. Does this sort of "double standards" always have some rational explanation? I do have some sort of idea as to what explains Western "double standards" but am fairly ignorant in the case of Iran so I thought I'd ask people with more expertise. To say that Western countries do it too does not really explain why, when and how Iran does it. Or are you saying that Iran does it specifically to match Western inconsistency? (Like "We can be just as inconsistent as you") But in fact what strikes me as odd sometimes in the case of Iran (maybe that's just because of my ignorance) is that their "double standards" cannot be explained using objective strategic arguments like they can for instance in the case of the US, that Iranian policies seem to be driven by ideology against what would seem to be their own objective strategic interests. For example an objective analysis would seem to indicate (unless it's again my ignorance) that Iran and Israel ought to be allies and the Arab countries in between should be adversaries to both. There does not seem to be anything about which Iran and Israel are objective competitors. But instead, because of ideology, you see this three-way enmity which must be a pretty rare if not unique geopolitical configuration. And to get back to my question, I really don't see why Iran needs Uzbekistan, whereas I thought there were important commercial relations between Germany and Iran. So, to just say "Western countries apply double standard too" can hardly serve as a useful explanation for Iranian behavior. Contact  Basemetal   here  15:02, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I think a fear of Colour Revolutions which had happened a year or two earlier in the same region might have caused a cautionary approach. This same fear led to government clampdown on peaceful demonstrations of Iranians after the presidential elections of 2009. Protesters were accused of having been inspired by Colour Revolutions and having subversive intentions. Omidinist (talk) 17:49, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I misread you. I thought that you were expressing moral outrage, when in fact you were honestly looking for an explanation.  My apologies.  In the Iranian legislative election, 2004, just one year before the massacre, Iran's Council of Guardians had vetoed the candidacy of more than 2,000 reformist candidates.  Support for Uzbeks protesting government repression would have been embarrassing and/or risky for the Iranian government, as it was complicit in such repression itself.  The government could well have felt that implicitly supporting the Uzbeki protests might provide an opening for domestic protests. (How could the government crack down after condemning the crackdown in Uzbekistan?) The demonstrations of 2009, mentioned by Omnidinist, bear out the risk (from the government's perspective) of anti-government protest in Iran at this time. Also, the defense of Islam is central to the Iranian government's claim to legitimacy.  In Uzbekistan, both the protesters and security forces were Muslim, and so there was no way Iran could portray Andijan as an assault on Islam or Muslims calling for an Iranian response.  In essence, the Iranian government saw nothing to gain from speaking out on the massacre.  By contrast, an assault on a Muslim in a western country is an opportunity for the Iranian government to bolster its legitimacy in the eyes of Iranian Muslims by speaking out in protest.  So its response to the murder in Germany was probably based more on domestic political considerations than foreign policy.  Marco polo (talk) 19:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Copyright for Maya hieroglyphs font based on drawings by scholar Thompson
Hello. I have a question about copyright law for a specific font. I've scanned through the Wikipedia article Intellectual property protection of typefaces but it's all pretty confusing with the technical difference between fonts, typefaces, etc. and what can be copyrighted and what can't.

Anyways, the creator of the font "Maya 4.14" here makes the following claim at the bottom of his page: "In lieu of a licence, fonts and documents in this site are not pieces of property or merchandise items; they carry no trademark, copyright, license or other market tags; they are free for any use. George Douros."

Basically, George Duoros based himself on "A Catalog of Maya Hieroglyphs by J. Eric S. Thompson" to make his font. The Catalog is composed of drawings made by Thompson and the use of his drawings is limited to scholarly use (see here) (Copyright © 1962 University of Oklahoma Press. All rights reserved.).

My question is, however, if I can use this font freely for whatever purpose, commercial or not, as George Duoros states/implies. I had understood that his drawings were copyrighted, but that fonts can't be copyrighted, and when George Duoros created this font he specifically stated that it os free for any use.

Thanks in advance!

--190.192.233.38 (talk) 01:42, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Read WP:COPY and if the advice there is not clear, ask for help at the WP:Help desk. Those pages specialize on such technical on-site issues. WE help with external matters, except things like law, and we'd be giving legal advice if we commented, which we are not allowed to do. μηδείς (talk) 05:48, 13 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Derivative work and transformativeness are probably relevant articles. SemanticMantis (talk) 13:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Parent & child life peers
Apart from Peter and James Palumbo, are there, or have there ever been, any other instances of a parent and child both being life peers? DuncanHill (talk) 18:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know where you can get a complete list, but it has certainly happened. For example, consider Anthony Hurd, Baron Hurd and Douglas Hurd, both of whom were Conservative Party politicians. RomanSpa (talk) 19:28, 13 May 2015 (UTC)


 * You could go through the four pages at List of life peerages and sort by last name which may give you something. I accidentally found Robin Hodgson, Baron Hodgson of Astley Abbotts who married Fiona Hodgson, Baroness Hodgson of Abinger in 1982. He became a life peer in 2000 and she became one in 2013. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 23:12, 14 May 2015 (UTC)


 * One pair I know of is James Callaghan, Baron Callaghan of Cardiff and his daughter Margaret Jay, Baroness Jay of Paddington. --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  06:02, 15 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I should have thought of Callaghan and Jay (and Jay's ex-father-in-law was also a life peer). DuncanHill (talk) 13:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Aha!
 * Here is a list of Family Connections of the Life Peers (bottom of page). I got to this via this forum, which I found by searching for family connections "life peers".  That forum page says the list needs updating (the list of life peers ends at 2005), but it's an improvement on what we have so far.
 * It also contains some other fascinating lordly tidbits, and I'm sure people who like this sort of thing will find that this is the sort of thing they like. --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  22:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks Jack. DuncanHill (talk) 23:00, 16 May 2015 (UTC)