Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2018 April 28

= April 28 =

Is this something that already exists?
It's a game, played on an 8x8 board. The board wraps around edge to edge, so that each square has 8 neighbours. Players alternately place one piece on a square. A player wins when they place a piece next to another player's piece such that it is outnumbered - meaning the number of enemy neighbours is greater than the number of friendly pieces (including the surrounded piece).

Is this something that already exists? Does it have a name and is there anything written about it? Thanks --Duomillia (talk) 00:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC)


 * It may not exist, but if you invented it, it would fit in the Go family, which all involve placing pieces on a grid in an attempt to surround an opponent.-- Jayron 32 02:33, 28 April 2018 (UTC)


 * If you join the sides of a rectangle, and also the top and bottom, then you actually get a torus shape in 3D. According to Go_variants, there already is a form of Go played on a toroidal board, called "ToroGo"... AnonMoos (talk) 07:21, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * ToroGo board for those, like me, who can't visualise a 3D torus. Alansplodge (talk) 09:38, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Cool! 174.16.98.178 (talk) 17:48, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Personal names on résumés
I was reading this article, which was published last year. It reports that people with white first names and white last names actually get more interviews and call-backs from potential employers. I have some questions.
 * Do employers have access to the name box on the employment application form? Or do they just look at the résumé's header to know the name of the person? What about large-scale retail stores and fast food restaurants where they typically just require an application, no chance to upload résumé/CV?
 * Does the résumé require your legal first name and last name? Or does the application require your legal first and last name while your résumé may include your personal name that you identify as?
 * If the employer contacts one of the minority's references by phone or by mail, then wouldn't the truth come out then - that the references know the applicant's true ethnicity?
 * Does the application or the résumé require the legal name at all? Is it possible to only offer the legal name as you hand your Social Security card to the Human Resource manager?
 * How do people with Spanish names and Arabic names fare in the job market?
 * If having a white-sounding first and last name can improve one's chances for an interview, then what are the steps to do it? And how long does it take or how much money it takes for the legal name change to be effective and permanent? Or is the process easier for newly naturalized citizens and people who adopt their spouses' family names? SSS (talk) 14:36, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Would you say "Robert Smith", for example, is a "white" name or a "black" name? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:51, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * White name. I personally know many Black-Americans having White-sounding names, esp. if they are part of the African American ethnic group, as opposed to being recent African immigrants or descendants of recent immigrants. SSS (talk) 15:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I cannot tell if "Robert Smith" would be white or black. Bus stop (talk) 15:06, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Neither can an employer. The point is: "UCLA researchers found that people envisioned men with stereotypically black names like Jamal or DeShawn as bigger and more violent compared to men with stereotypically white names". Similar research in Australia seems to be more class related than racist, see 'Bogan' baby names could damage a child's future career prospects ....   Alansplodge (talk) 17:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * That particular book seems to have some holes in its research: since when has Nicomachus been a bogan name? Presumably Aristotle and Hippocrates and so on are bogan names too? (Either that, or Brazilian soccer players.) Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 23:28, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * There is some commentary from the author here on it and other names although it reveals nothing about the popularity or where it was found. One of the confusing things may be that a large number of sources (independently or not I don't know) [//www.practicalparenting.com.au/australia-s-most-bogan-baby-names-revealed]   say it's listed in the book  as a "popular 'bogan' names". However it seems clear from the description of the book and the author's comments that this is as much an entertainment book as anything.  So I wonder whether it really lists Nicomachus as a popular bogan baby name or a 'bogan baby name'. There's would seem to be a big difference between the two. It's not hard to imagine the author may be aware of one to three people who may be identified as 'bogan' who've given their child the name Nicomanchus. (And whatever the origins, it doesn't seem to be a name that Australians of any ethnicity tend to given their children. Some bogan names are of course similar, names that may or are popular in some place at some time, but would otherwise be unheard of in Australia.)  Actually determining its popularity is likely to be difficult especially beyond the top 100 or so. If you have access to birth registration records, you could at least determine overall popularity although connecting this to 'bogans' is likely to be a lot more difficult. But I think that's a big if. This report on overall names in 2017 [//mccrindle.worldsecuresystems.com/blog/2017/04/Baby%20Names%20Report%202017.pdf] doesn't mention the data source. Older versions (which I can't link to because they seem dead say) something like "".  However I don't think these actually provided all names unless it was privately as part of some special agreement but I doubt it. I had a quick look and only found South Australia providing all names in 2017 [//data.sa.gov.au/data/dataset/popular-baby-names]. (Nicomachus wasn't on it. Donald, Cedric, Cecil, Aether, Jaylandouglas were equal 803th place with 1 registration. Total was 9529.) Often it's only a top 100. Another source with similar analysis goes into more details on the data limitations .  And even among people who may be identified as 'bogan', I'd imagine these still some similarity of behaviour in that there's a high number of children given the most popular names so by the time you reach the 100th, you're probably at least one order of magnitude off the most popular name. So trying to do this by survey is likely to fail unless you use a very large sample size.  P.S. The South Australia data is interesting. I guess the small size of the place but I imagined Harry Potter may have given Cedric a small boost but I looked from 1999 to 2006 and didn't find any except a Cedric in 1999 and a Cedrick in 2006. Or maybe I'm looking at the wrong time and any boost is more likely around now and later when those who grew up reading Harry Potter. Other than 2017, I also found 1 in 2013 and 2 in 2016. I also found a Joesph and a Jo-J0 (the second one is a zero) in 2004 and a Joeseph and Johnathan in 2002 which I presume are intentional not typos or 'don't know how to spell' cases.  Nil Einne (talk) 13:33, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Wz have an article on bogan. Urban dictionary describes [|Cedric]s as particularly good soccer players but in fact one portuguese renowned soccer player goes by that name. However the name has been very popular in the francophone world since the late eighties ( and giving reason for a new and softer version of Dennis the Manace (US): it's called Cédric). I guess Aussies going after soft Europeans so early without a more notable transition than enouragement by J. K. Rowling, rthat would mean something. --Askedonty (talk) 16:04, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Where I work, CVs go to HR who anonymize the CVs before passing onto the department heads for scrutiny. I work in the IT team and we all get to read the CVs and chip in opinions. Sometimes you can guess the ethnicity of the candidates. --TrogWoolley (talk) 12:00, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * If HR was the source of the problem, anonymizing wouldn't help. For example, I work with HR departments at eight different universities. When a person is applying for a professorship, they filter out anyone with a military background. The assumption is that having a military background makes a person unfit to teach in a classroom. So, you can't blame a department for refusing to hire someone with a military background. They simply never receive the CV from HR. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 09:58, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * That's entirely illegal; I assume you're doing your ethical duty and reporting this to the appropriate authorities, or at least refusing employment from these universities. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 14:47, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * How do you prove it? I know about it because the workers mention it. Will they admit to it in court? Of course not. Once you shine a light on it, they interview a token guy with military background to claim it is fake. You also can't make a blanket claim because universities like The Citadel do hire professors with military background. So, it is a weak argument. The point is that HR controls who the department sees. So, in the case of the conversation in this thread, if HR kicks out ethnic-sounding names, the department won't see them. You can't blame the department or interviewers. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 17:34, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * "If the employer contacts one of the minority's references by phone or by mail, then wouldn't the truth come out then?" You call yourself super smart, but you need to ask that question? --Lgriot (talk) 12:42, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Runaway children and doorstep babies
Nowadays, can people take in babies left at their doorsteps or runaway children without a home and family? Or do they have to turn the children in to the police? SSS (talk) 23:09, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I challenge the RefDesk to find a jurisdiction in which "finders keepers" applies to human foundlings. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 02:09, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * (E/C) Adoptions are generally governed by laws in most western jurisdictions. Our article on the topic has a section called How adoptions originate that discusses the usual scenarios, including the "doorbell baby". As with any other activity where laws or regulations may be in force, the word "can" is tricky. You can do almost anything, but there may be repercussions depending on a whole host of specifics. Adoption in the United States has some more, assuming you're American. Matt Deres (talk) 02:16, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, maybe Child abandonment is more apropos. Matt Deres (talk) 02:18, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Around here at least (California), hospitals have drop-off points for turning in babies (called "surrendering" them) instead of leaving them on doorsteps. The drop-off points have an emblem like this.  Some more info.  173.228.123.166 (talk) 08:05, 30 April 2018 (UTC)


 * In Texas, fire stations have yellow-and-black signs saying "Safe Baby Site" (don't know about hospitals)... AnonMoos (talk) 15:47, 30 April 2018 (UTC)


 * WHAAOE: Baby hatch, a modern take on the old Foundling hospital. Plus ca change. But neither article attempts to answer the legal question. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 19:32, 30 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I haven't noticed any "baby hatch" at the three or four Texas fire stations I've walked past... AnonMoos (talk) 01:22, 1 May 2018 (UTC)


 * In the U.S., all states have some form of a Safe-haven law which allow parents to leave unwanted children at certain "safe havens" without penalty for abandonment. This allows the child to be left with a safe agency (often a designated hospital, fire department, police department, or religious organization) where they can be safely cared for, and allows the parents freedom from prosecution for child abandonment.  -- Jayron 32 02:09, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Certainly in California (penal code 278), and I'm sure in most other civilized places, what you described is likely considered child abduction. Even in medieval European law, abandoned children were to become wards of specific relatives, and if no such relatives were able to care for the child or even existed, guardianship was supposed to be decided by "other relatives" and a judge. You couldn't just keep someone you found. The "foundling laws" were typically to allow parents to abandon their children in the care of a specific person of their choosing. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:52, 1 May 2018 (UTC)


 * The plot of Silas Marner involves someone in early 19th-century England adopting a toddler who accidentally turned up at his doorstep (her mother having died). The alternative would have been to turn the toddler over to the Poor law authorities (where the quality of the care she received would have depended on local conditions which varied quite a bit between different parishes...).  I assume that would have needed a magistrate's approval, but the tendency in many areas would have been to approve anything that looked half-way decent, if it avoided placing an additional burden on the local "poor rates"... -- AnonMoos (talk) 11:46, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * And wasn't poor old Silas grateful for the help of Dolly Winthrop! It is one thing to say that the authorities were content to approve a somewhat irregular situation as a convenience to the Poor Law guardians, given that the child was being well cared for - a mutually beneficial arrangement. It would be something else entirely for the authorities to acknowledge the finder's right to keep the foundling. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 00:39, 2 May 2018 (UTC)