Open main menu

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

< Wikipedia:Reference desk  (Redirected from Wikipedia:RD/H)

The Wikipedia Reference Desk covering the topic of humanities.

Welcome to the humanities reference desk.
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

  • Provide a short header that gives the general topic of the question.
  • Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Post your question to only one desk.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. All answers will be provided here.
  • Specific questions, that are likely to produce reliable sources, will tend to get clearer answers.
  • Note:
    • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
    • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
    • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
    • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

  • The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
Choose a topic:
See also:
Help desk
Village pump
Help manual


July 10Edit

Factors leading to independence modern nation by modern nation British empireEdit

Is there a website or some websites that shows the factors that lead to the independence of each modern-day nation from the British Empire. So far, I know that the World War II, racial prejudice and racial discrimination and religious discrimination were the factors that lead to Indian, Pakistani and later on Bangladeshi independence. Please and thank you. Donmust90 (talk) 01:49, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, you can go to the Wikipedia pages for each of the countries that were previously part of the British Empire and see how they acquired independence. This Wikipedia article could help you get started on this: List of countries that have gained independence from the United Kingdom. Futurist110 (talk) 02:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
DonMust90 -- In the 20th century, Ireland gained independence in a bloody war; the "old" or White dominions gained ever-increasing autonomy through a series of slow and gradual steps; India and Pakistan gained independence due to the aftermath of WW2, an increasing ratio of imperial costs to benefits, and the policies of the UK Labour government elected in 1945; and Israel gained independence because the UK threw up its hands in the air, admitted it was unable to determine the future of the Palestine Mandate, and threw the whole thing into the lap of the United Nations. Then the Tories came back into power, and Winston Churchill during his second stint as UK prime minister during the 1950s was determined to hold the lid on any further decolonizations. After Churchill left office in 1955, the pressures to decolonize became strong, and it wasn't all that long before the British "empire" consisted mainly of small islands and peninsulas. AnonMoos (talk) 04:35, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Just to note that Israel or even Palestine at the time was never part of the "Empire". -- 16:09, 10 July 2019 MilborneOne
It was a British-administered territory, not technically too different in status from British Cameroons or Tanganyika... AnonMoos (talk) 20:14, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
You didn't mention Africa here. Futurist110 (talk) 07:40, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
The Union of South Africa was an old/white Dominion; otherwise independence of British African colonies belongs to the post-Churchill phase, starting with Ghana in 1957 (also the rather peculiar case of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan in 1956). AnonMoos (talk) 08:09, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
There is a brief outline at Decolonisation of Africa#British Empire. The fiercest insurgency was the Mau Mau Uprising in Kenya Colony. Whether this hastened independence or not is debated. Alansplodge (talk) 16:00, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
See also Wind of Change (speech). Alansplodge (talk) 17:06, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
In India's case, there was a relatively long-running Indian independence movement (1857-1947). The Nationalist Movements in India helped form a relatively cohesive "Indian" identity out of the disparate populations of the British Raj. In Ireland's case, the Irish War of Independence (1919-1921) was partly a result of the rise of Irish nationalism, partly a result of the Irish Home Rule movement (1870-1921) failing to fully achieve its goals, and partly dissatisfaction in Ireland over forced military service in World War I. The Conscription Crisis of 1918 show much of the Irish population unite in opposition to the military draft.:
  • "Completely ineffectual as a means to bolster battalions in France, the events surrounding the Conscription Crisis were disastrous for the Dublin Castle authorities, and for the more moderate nationalist parties in Ireland. The delay in finding a resolution to the home rule issue, partly caused by the war, and exaggerated by the Conscription Crisis in Ireland, all increased support for Sinn Féin." Dimadick (talk) 08:16, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Why didn't Louis, Count of Soissons ever marry or have any legitimate children?Edit

Why didn't Louis, Count of Soissons ever marry or have any legitimate children? He got killed at age 37 and thus had plenty of time to get married and have legitimate children but never did. He also had an illegitimate son a year before he was killed, so it's unlikely that he was gay.

Any thoughts on this? Futurist110 (talk) 03:01, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

My fist thought is that according to our article "around 1610, he and Marie de Bourbon, Duchess of Montpensier, were joined in contractual marriage", although that disagrees with the German Wikipdia article. If the German version (and hence your assumption) is correct: As a Prince of the Blood, he did not have too many candidates of appropriate rank, and most of his attempts seem to have failed. He did apparently try for the kings sister, and for Marie de Bourbon, and was foiled by Richelieu for political reasons. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 06:04, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Why not marry a noblewoman of lower rank if he couldn't marry a princess, though? I mean, the Bourbon-Vendome branch was notable for marrying nobility. For instance, the wives of James I, Count of La Marche, John I, Count of La Marche, Louis, Count of Vendome, John VIII, Count of Vendome, Henri I, Prince of Conde, Henri II, Prince of Conde, Louis, Grand Conde et cetera all came from the French nobility. Futurist110 (talk) 06:44, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Most gay men were married with children, back in the day. Eg Philippe I, Duke of Orléans.
Some, certainly, but not I'm not sure about "most." For instance, Frederick the Great was likely gay and yet he never had any children. Futurist110 (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Frederick was married. Marriage was not a love affair, and offspring were expected. Gay men would be given the same instruction as women: "close you eyes and think of England"/do your duty. So: most. Gem fr (talk) 20:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
So, he probably wasn't, but that is just irrelevant anyway.
Gay men, even if married, didn't have illegitimate children. I just wanted to point that out. Philip I, Duke of Orleans never had illegitimate children--likely because having sex with his wives was hard enough for him and thus he didn't want to have sex with any other women. Futurist110 (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
That is why I think he probably wasn't gay Gem fr (talk) 20:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
I find it unlikely that gay men never had illegitimate children even if I'll give it was unlikely to be common and the current general understanding of gay as being exclusively or almost exclusively attracted to men. The acceptance of being gay varied from place to place and time to time. In situations where it was poorly accepted, maintaining a mistress may have bee one way to maintain cover. Especially in cases where who you married had little to do with any personal feelings or wants. And while the relationship may have been mostly for show, some sex may have been a necessary part of the process. Likewise while taking a mistress may have often been mostly about sexual desires, it seems likely in some cases there would have been a political angle. Also while I mentioned mistresses, a person could have illegitimate children with someone who wouldn't generally be called a mistress anyway. E.g. a slave they raped a few times. Possibly involving some combination of these, rejecting an "offer" of a female "companion" may have been problematic for some. Nil Einne (talk) 15:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
1. He obviously hold grudges to Richelieu. 2. As a Prince of blood, he needed permission from the king (in effect: from Richelieu) to marry. Now do the math Gem fr (talk) 07:58, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
That's actually a good point. I checked the Wikipedia article for Gaston, Duke of Orleans (Soissons's cousin and co-conspirator) and Louis XIII and Richelieu didn't allow him (Gaston) to get re-married until Louis XIII was on his deathbed and Gaston begged him for forgiveness. Thus, the same might have been true for Soissons. Of course, Soissons didn't actually live long enough to ask Louis XIII for forgiveness, but it is nevertheless interesting to wonder if he would have indeed done this had he lived. Futurist110 (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
He was in love with a beautiful blonde once. She drove him to drink. For that, he was forever in her debt. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:37, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Who? Futurist110 (talk) 04:04, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
He never said. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Futurist110 -- I'm afraid that Baseball_Bugs is paraphrasing a classic W.C. Fields quote... AnonMoos (talk) 06:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
"Frederick was married" Yes, but his military campaigns often required him and his wife Elisabeth Christine of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel-Bevern to live apart from each other.: "In 1763, when Frederick saw his wife for the first time in six years, he only commented: "Madame has grown quite fat." "Dimadick (talk) 08:30, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Your statement does two things: (1) Countering the statement that he never married; and (2) probably explaining why he didn't have children. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:45, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Herodotus Histories Volume IIEdit

I have a copy of Herodotus - Histories Volume II. It is a first edition print of the publication from 1910. Can anyone give vague value on this. Its a great book and well worth a read. Its in hard cover, and beautiful though it may need some restoration to make it ideal for sale. Thanks Anton (talk) 10:15, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

$18.69 (1927 edition, good condition) to $99 (1862 edition, "Antique with lots of wear.") based on e-bay. (talk) 10:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Could you please provide a link? Anton (talk) 11:22, 10 July 2019 (UTC) (talk) 11:56, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Pont del Diable chapel?Edit

In the article bridge chapel, someone has added Pont del Diable in the list of examples. It certainly has a small chapel-like structure on the central span and it's dedicated to Sant Bartomeu, but I can't find a reference that says it is (or was) an actual place of worship. Any ideas? Alansplodge (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Not a chapel in 1879/1882, per this traveller, "...immediately above the keystone of the central arch is a stone lodge, through which the roadway becomes but a narrow passage, for on each side are stone seats. In the wall of this lodge are two inscribed tablets..." (giving the dates of construction and repair) and this traveller, "On the summit is a sort of portico...". (talk) 20:36, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
P.S. found an image of the interior of the modern reconstruction - definitely not a chapel. Doesn't even have the benches the 1879 person mentioned. pic here (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Wonderful, thank you. Alansplodge (talk) 10:15, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

July 11Edit

When did land travel become extremely popular?Edit

When did land travel become extremely popular? For instance, here is a scenario for you--let's say that someone wants to get from Marseille/Marseilles to Dunkirk/Dunkerque (both of which are located in France nowadays). Nowadays the best way to do this would probably be by land--either by car or by train--or, alternatively, by plane/air. 100 years ago, the best way to do this would have probably still been by land--especially considering that air travel doesn't appear to have been an option yet 100 years ago. However, what about 200 years ago or 300 years ago or 400 years ago or 500 years ago? Would one have still traveled on land--either on horseback or by carriage--back then or would one have traveled by sea to get from Marseilles to Dunkirk back then?

Any thoughts on this? Futurist110 (talk) 00:04, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

  • Top of head answer: this is going to depend a lot on the development of a road system in a particular country. Clear back in Roman times, much of Europe actually had pretty good roads (and not much danger from brigands), but for over a millennium that steadily deteriorated, bottoming out in different places, from what I've read, anywhere between the 16th & 19th centuries (when depends on where).
Were any countries able to quickly revive and restore their road systems after the collapse of the Roman Empire--perhaps within a time-frame of a couple of centuries? Futurist110 (talk) 00:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
There really are no "countries" to speak of in Europe for nearly a millennium after that. There are occasional periods when some monarch unites a region (Charlemagne being the most prominent). I don't think any of them were particularly big as road-builders, but someone might have been at some time. - Jmabel | Talk 00:19, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Also, especially in terms of the 19th century, don't forget canals. In many places, those were actually the best way to get around for a couple of generations before railways came in.
Were all canals actually navigable by boats and ships, though? Futurist110 (talk) 00:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Not by ocean-going ships unless the canal was built for that specific purpose, but there were canal boats. -- (talk) 00:58, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
  • The Atlantic Ocean was always a tough one, though, so from Marseille to Dunkirk, land travel would have won out a lot sooner than, say from Marseille to Venice or Dunkirk to Gdansk. - Jmabel | Talk 00:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Makes sense. Also, what about from Bordeaux to Dunkirk? Futurist110 (talk) 00:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
When you say "popular" are you talking about commerce or vacations? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:38, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Both. Any form of travel, really. Futurist110 (talk) 00:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
It would be a function of economics to a great extent. If you look at the westward migration in America, much of it was driven by economic necessity. Demand drove the technology, and vice versa. Hence railroads, and more railroads; and then cars and highways, and more cars and more highways. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:57, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Railways. At least in Europe. This began around 1830, with great expansion during the railway boom of the 1840s.
Before this, people didn't travel. For statistically significant proportions of "people" and "travel". Too awkward, too expensive, too little need to. Of course, some people travelled. A handful were carters, drovers etc. who travelled all the time, as an occupation. Some were business people, or their agents, who needed to travel between locations. Even the poor drifted slowly (usually on foot) in search of work. But travel was generally rare.
Canals pre-dated the roads, but didn't ever become a widespread means of passenger transport. Even the railways took a decade (or longer, depending how you count) before they started carrying passengers rather than coal (see Swansea and Mumbles Railway and the Stockton and Darlington Railway).
Roads were in a poor state and weren't improved enough to become a means of mass transport until after the railways. Although turnpikes had improved the process of road travel by the public stagecoaches rather earlier, even though it was still a rare thing to do.
Coastal sea travel was popular, although hazardous. Before the canals it was the standard way of moving heavy freight and the passenger traffic was in some ways a better way to travel than by road. However before the establishment of lighthouses, navigation close inshore was a far more dangerous business that sailing far out to sea, with much less risk of wreck. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:17, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
This has a lot to do with geography and development. I was a little surprised recently to discover how much travel, and particularly trade still depends on boats along the coastal areas of the Top End of the Northern Territory of my "advanced" country, Australia. Away from major highways, a lot of the roads are impassable in The Wet, so it makes sense. HiLo48 (talk) 01:23, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
As a child, I loved documentaries on "exotic" Australia (commonly available through Hellenic Broadcasting Corporation broadcasts in the 1980s and 1990s). Most of them did mention that navigating Australia by land is either impossible or extremely dangerous, and that the country largely depends on ships and airplanes for transportation of people and goods. Has anything changed since then? Dimadick (talk) 09:02, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Land travels always were the main mean of transport, unless special case of relatively safe seafaring (Mediterranean or baltic/hanseatic travel, for instance), second only to inland waterways when available (but you have to pay the transport). eg: Camino de Santiago, silk road. Gem fr (talk) 07:11, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
"especially considering that air travel doesn't appear to have been an option yet 100 years ago." Wrong premise. 100 years ago translates to 1919. Airlines had already been established, starting with DELAG (1909-1935), Aircraft Transport and Travel (1916-1921), Deutsche Luft-Reederei (1917-1926), Aéropostale (1918-1933), KLM (1919-), Avianca (1919-), Handley Page Transport (1919-1924), Société Générale des Transports Aériens (1919-1933), and Compagnie des Messageries Aériennes (1919-1923). Dimadick (talk) 08:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
But hardly "popular"; many early passenger aircraft carried less than 6 passengers and the cost of a flight from London to Paris was £5, [1] at a time when a skilled worker earned less than £2 per week. [2] Alansplodge (talk) 12:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
In the United States, passenger air travel was a fairly narrow niche market for people with cash to spend and willing to endure a significant degree of risk and/or discomfort, until the Boeing 247 was introduced in 1933 (soon followed by the Douglas DC-3 and others). I don't know anything about most of the companies mentioned in Dimadick's comment above, but the names of at least two of them ("Aéropostale" and "Compagnie des Messageries Aériennes") suggest that they were founded mainly to carry airmail -- one of the main commercial applications of airplanes in the 1918-1933 period. Also, passenger air travel didn't really begin to supplant transatlantic ocean liners until around 1960... AnonMoos (talk) 16:00, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Fernand Braudel is very good on what travel meant in Europe in the 1500s. Several chapters of The Mediterranean are devoted to this. - Jmabel | Talk 00:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Which ethnic group(s) lived in the St. Petersburg area before Peter I built it?Edit

Which ethnic group(s) lived in the St. Petersburg area before Russian Tsar Peter the Great built it? Futurist110 (talk) 00:19, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Ingrian Finns. See also Ingria, Izhorians and Votes. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:11, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! Futurist110 (talk) 06:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
That sure was a smart move by Peter I. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:30, 11 July 2019 (UTC)


I have a problem with the artist Vito Bongiorno's page the page has been inserted in draft for lack of sources

I have sources to add the credibility and importance of the artist

Can anyone help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francesco devi (talkcontribs) 11:01, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Francesco devi, since you already have sources I don't know how much help we can be here, but I've requested the friendly people at the Wikipedia Teahouse to come over and help you out. They're good at explaining processes. You can also go here and speak with them directly. Good luck, (talk) 15:40, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Francesco devi I saw the note at the Teahouse. I made some minor improvements to the article, but can't find English language coverage of the artist. Hopefully others who speak Italian can find some coverage about him such as biographical profiles that aren't just descriptions of his art. (Please sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes like this: ~~~~.) TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 17:44, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

London MagazineEdit


I don't think I've ever actually used Ref Desk before, so apologies if not within your remit.

I was hoping someone might have a London Magazine subscription or find somewhere else online to be able to see the full Jun-July 2005 copy the one with its headers given here, this pdf has a small fragment.

We're looking for the Lichtig review on Brian Howell - there's one source already but another would be needed to legitimately delete the current PROD.

Cheers Nosebagbear (talk) 11:12, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Sup, @Nosebagbear: Best place for that kind of thing is the resource exchange, which you will find filled with friendly and happy-to-help types with access to most sources any Wikipedian could ever need :) ——SerialNumber54129 11:14, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Please identify a portrait with an inscription in HebrewEdit

A friend was given this portrait, made of brass. The subject is a bearded man and there is an inscription in Hebrew below the image. The back has a small "Made in Israel" stamp in English. My friend has no Jewish or Israeli connection at all. What does the inscription say, who is the man and what is his "claim to fame"? (I uploaded the photo to the Flickr site instead of here as I have no idea of the portrait's copyright status). Thanks Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:59, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, my Hebrew's not the best, but the four letters in the second row say "Herzl" so I guess that's who it is.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:02, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
It's one of his quotes. "Im tirtzu, ain zo agada" or "If you will it, it is not a dream".--Wehwalt (talk) 12:10, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Wehwalt, so it's basically an Israeli political icon. I will send the quote translation and bio article to my friend. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:30, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
In Israel, Theodor Herzl is considered a kind of visionary founding father. Considering he died in 1904, even before the Balfour declaration or the establishment of the British Mandate, he's not really a "political icon" in the sense of being directly implicated in the politics of the modern state of Israel, AnonMoos (talk) 16:22, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
AnonMoos, no I meant the brass portrait itself is a type of icon, but depicting a politically significant person instead of a Russian saint. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:21, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

A Brady Bunch type of situationEdit

Let's say that we have a Brady Bunch type of situation: mother has three biological daughters; father has three biological sons; mother and father marry to create a blended family of six children / step-children. My question: by this marriage, does the father have any "legal rights" to the three daughters? Is he legally their "father"? Or is he simply their "step-father"? And do any "legal rights" attach to the the role of "step-father"? So, for example, are the three step-daughters considered "heirs" of the step-father? Or, upon the father's death, he has only three heirs -- his three biological sons -- plus the wife (if she survives him)? If the step-father wants the "full legal rights" (as relates to the three step-daughters), does he have to actually legally adopt the three step-daughters? I was wondering about this sort of thing. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:38, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I guarantee this is going to vary by country/state. Matt Deres (talk) 18:26, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes, true. I am referring to the USA. Which I thought was implicit in the question, since I was referring to the character of Mike Brady in the Brady Bunch scenario. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:28, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
It is still going to vary by state. MarnetteD|Talk 18:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. That's obvious. I am not seeking a 50-state analysis. I am seeking generalities. Or examples. Again, I thought obvious. Guess I need to spell out all minutiae, when I ask a question. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:00, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
When you write "I am referring to the USA" that is not minutia. Again there is no way to generalize since it is going to vary by state. I'd have thought that was obvious. MarnetteD|Talk 19:07, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I think we have here an American who is unaware of the global reach of great American exports like The Brady Bunch. HiLo48 (talk) 23:18, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
You all got even by sending us Jacko. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
True. My sincerest apologies. HiLo48 (talk) 02:37, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
I was referring to a very specific character (Mike Brady) in a very specific TV show (The Brady Bunch). Implicit in all of that is the USA. What did you infer from the question, that I was asking about the state of affairs in Pakistan or Gabon? Seriously? On a side note, isn't the public education system in the USA simply wonderful? Never ceases to amaze us all. Wow. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:56, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
No. You weren't. You very clearly referred to a situation "like" the Brady Bunch. You did not refer specifically to the Brady Bunch. You could greatly simplify your question by asking if Mike Brady on the Brady Bunch had a legal responsibility for the girls. Yes. In that specific setting, Mike Brady was responsible for the girls and would be responsible for child support if they divorced. The catch is that it is never revealed exactly how much money the mother and father make. So, it could possibly go the other way, with the mother paying child support for the boys. But, in the 70s, it was extremely rare and nearly impossible for a man to get a ruling for child support from a woman. (talk) 17:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for making my own point for me, and contradicting your own point. Asking about someone "like" Mike Brady is the same exact thing as asking about someone "similarly situated" as Mike Brady. There is no difference. Hence, the question implies USA. Again, thanks for making my point and contradicting your own point. Or, does the word "like" mean something different to you? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:05, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
AFAIK, in general, step- have no right nor obligation to each other, and are considered strangers for legal purpose. But they will have indirect obligations through the spouse link, or the fact that, say, they are those with property rights of the home; all this may even be part of a marriage contract, which certainly can provide some "you will take care of my previous children as if yours" clause. This is really general, and local statutes may have different views, as pointed out by Matt Deres. Gem fr (talk) 20:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Gem fr. But, Gem fr, it's gonna vary by state. Didn't you know that? So, why give any answers at all to the original question? Because, you know, it's gonna vary by state. (As if the "varies by state" theme is dispositive of the issue.) Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
As with the rules for license plate numbers. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
You may be interested in For the first time in New York, non-biological parents have legal rights. Alansplodge (talk) 21:17, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
We have Stepfamily#Legal_status, sourced to this, an American resource. (talk) 23:57, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
In a fictional family, anything can happen. In practice, there's the matter of whether the step-parents adopt the kids, and such as that. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:03, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Alright, actual answer. Joseph A. Spadaro, of course it varies but state, but what you're looking for are state-level statutes usually named something like "Intestate Succession". As usual, I will use California as an example, which has relevant statutes in sections 6100 - 6806 of the Probate Code. It is made very clear in Division 6, Part 2, Chapter 1, that inheritance priority is given to the spouse and issue of the decedent, and not step-children. Only if the decedent has not stated who inherits, and has no surviving issue, parents, spouse, grandparents, aunts, uncles, siblings or first-cousins are the step-children entitled by statute to inheritance. However, at this point we have to make sure we know how the State of California defines "issue". Sections 21101 - 21118 make it clear by exception that stepchildren are not automatically included in the group "issue", but children may be. So how does California define "children"? This is provided in Chapter 2, which shows that it is normally required that a child be natural (with some exceptions), or be legally adopted. Of course the exceptions have exceptions and the howevers have howevers, and an exception is made for stepchildren that had a parent-child relationship with their stepparent that began during the child's minor years, and "It is established by clear and convincing evidence that the foster parent or stepparent would have adopted the person but for a legal barrier." So short of adoption, there is that one narrow hole through which an unadopted stepchild could potentially claim full inheritance rights of a child. This same statute also explicitly recognizes but does not define the common law concept of "equitable adoption" (also known as adoption by estoppel, virtual adoption, and de facto adoption). This is essentially the adoption version of common law marriage, where a court may recognize as an adopted child someone whom the decedent had been treating as his child. What that means, unfortunately you can't just look it up in a statute, but there are court decisions and law review articles you could look up on it, of course varying by state once again. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:01, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Someguy1221: Thanks for a reply that is actually helpful and well-thought out. As opposed to one that is unhelpful and dismissive. Sometimes, people on these Reference Desks just want to hear themselves talk, and offer nothing of substance to the discussion. And -- typically -- it's the usual suspects. Then we wonder why there is a perennial proposal to rid Wikipedia of these Reference Desks. Thanks again for your reply. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:57, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
So it's going to depend on at least a couple of factors: (1) whether the stepfather adopts the children; and/or (2) the wording of the stepfather's will, if any. If he failed to make out a will, that's Someguy's scenario. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:17, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:21, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Are there any parties more left than >50% their electorate with conservative in their name?Edit

Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:23, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

wot? Gem fr (talk) 00:29, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Does a party with conservative in their name in a way that can be construed as self-identifying (i.e. Conservative Peoples Action Party but not Anticonservative Party or Conservatives Suck Party) ever end up being left wing by drift of the party or drift of the spectrum or by the name being fake in the first place? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:03, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
The difficulty with this question is that there is no objective way to quantify the "leftness" either of a party or of the electorate. So there is no practical way to think about it. -- (talk) 02:15, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Traditionally that's a UK Commonwealth type of name. No idea what's going to happen to the UK Conservatives next election. The current AU government afaict is politically conservative but may not be using that name. The US Republicans might have a majority of the electorate at any given moment but they've never used the name. In the US, only minor parties have used it, just like "liberal". I don't know of any party anywhere calling itself "centrist" but that seems to be an influential ideology in many parties regardless. (talk) 04:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
There was the "Zentrum" in Weimar Germany. AnonMoos (talk) 04:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Sagittarian Milky Way -- if you want a discrepancy between a party's ideology and its name, then in various countries at various times there were parties with "Radical" in their names which were not particularly radical in the ordinary meaning of the word... AnonMoos (talk) 04:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Indeed. Another discrepancy is pretty much all left parties, which dumped the working class issues and materialism, and instead adopted as their core belief a mix of the most far-right, reactionary, extremism known as "environmentalism", and concern about complete aliens most of the time not even in the country (aka colonial paternalism), and elitism (you rather expect in the right side of the political spectrum), all of them combined with a trust in The Crown to always do better than the People, so a desire to empower it as much as possible (which is just the very opposite of where the left was born). So, left, right... what does that mean anyway? Gem fr (talk) 08:40, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
A possibility is the Conservative Party (Norway), which is on the right in Norway, but might be considered left-of-centre if it were suddenly dropped into the US system due to its support for Norway's extensive welfare system. Alansplodge (talk) 23:05, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
it was referred to their electorate. Not USA's. If you drop this party into US system, do it for their electorate too Gem fr (talk) 07:58, 13 July 2019 (UTC).
"I don't know of any party anywhere calling itself "centrist" " Greece used to have the Centre Union (1963-1974), created from a merger of Venizelist parties. It was a major party in the 1960s, though marginalized during the Greek military junta of 1967–1974. It was replaced by the Centre Union – New Forces (1974-1976) and then by the Union of the Democratic Centre (1976-2012), neither of which had much electoral success. The remnants of the Union joined Syriza in 2012, which was a much larger party. In the last few years, the most notable centrist party is the Union of Centrists (1992-). It has participated in 11 Parliamentary elections, and has only once managed to gain entrance in the Greek Parliament (from 2015 to 2019). Dimadick (talk) 15:42, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

When did they stop making piers longer on Manhattan?Edit

The newest and outermost layer that's about 800 feet long and touching the pierhead line allowed by the Army Corps of Engineers, not the long gone ones from centuries ago that are now inside the ring road (West Side Highway/West Street/South Street etc).

When did they start filling in the water between some of them or removing piers? The piers follow a regular spacing and some have been removed (condemned for rotting?) while in other places the land was extended and stuff built on the new land like buildings, parks and so on. Even entire neighborhoods like Battery Park City. I know they started doing this by the Great Depression. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:02, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

July 12Edit

Dry and wet colorsEdit

Nobody bothers to classify colors this way, but I find it natural to think that while yellow (the variant that's the color of many diamond-shaped road signs in the United States) is dry, fluorescent yellow-green (which in recent years has replaced yellow on some school-related signs) is wet. Any precise definition of a wet color. (Please look at the difference between the colors before you respond.) Georgia guy (talk) 01:15, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Maybe this has to do with the glossiness (or not) of the paint? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Maybe fluorescence per se, or maybe a non-opaque solid color on a white background? I don't know how wet colors look on a screen. Do you have a picture link? (talk) 04:09, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Isn't it just the gloss that makes a colour look wet (as BB says above), rather than the colour itself? I've never seen your road signs, so I can't compare them. Might the perception be a form of Synesthesia? Dbfirs 07:09, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps it's the difference between warm and cool colours?-gadfium 08:34, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
In media, toxic slime, radioactive waste, etc is often portrayed as a lurid or fluorescent yellow or green colour. Could this be subconsciously influencing your perception? Iapetus (talk) 08:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
I concur that gloss is the place to look at. Gem fr (talk) 08:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Gloss is the main factor in visually distinguishing between wet or dry fabrics, except that some fabrics are intentionally made to look wet even when dry. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:31, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

"Coal and Power" enquiry - David Lloyd GeorgeEdit

I have a copy of Lloyd George, David (1924). Coal and Power: The Report of an Enquiry presided over by The Right Hon. D. Lloyd George O.M., M.P. London: Hodder and Stoughton. In the Introduction LlG says "a number of people, including Liberal Member of Parliament and others representative of the different elements in the industry and of the public life of the country, were invited to form a Committee, of which I was Chairman...", the book is the report of that committee. I would like to know the membership of the committee. John Campbell described it as a "somewhat shadowy, indeed anonymous, body".[1] Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 13:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I am surprised that the membership is not mentioned in the book. I thought this kind of report always tell who was a member, who was invited to speak, etc. Is this not the case? Gem fr (talk) 13:26, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
It is not. There is an Appendix by R. A. Scott-James, and the Library Edition, which I do not have, contains additional reports by Mr Ivor Evans MA on Germany and Mr Lionel Hill BSc (no relation) on France.
Hi DuncanHill, the "shadowy body" may have been the Liberal Summer School, (though they wouldn't have been the only members, per this: "The Committee consisted of many

engineers and public men".)

Source one: [The Liberal Summer School] "set up a research department...and began to play an active role in the preparation of the Liberal reports of the 1920s, the first of which was Coal and Power. Although the report, published in July 1924, appeared over Lloyd George's signature, liberals hastened to point out its intellectual pedigree, stretching from the Sankey Commission via McNair's LSS activities and pamphlet." This in turn is sourced to a newspaper article and a book that we might be able to find: 'New Mines for Old', Nation, 19.7.1924 and A. McNair, The Problem of the Coal Mines (London, 1924)
Source two: This gives a lot of the names in the Liberal Summer School movement, including those who were interested in coal and electricity.
lengthy quote from Source two
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

E. D. Simon, a wealthy Mancunian industrialist, ... was the moving spirit behind this liberal revival and in 1919, together with Colonel Thomas F. Tweed—at the time the Manchester Liberal Federation's agent and later the north?west Liberal organizer—prevailed upon Ramsay Muir, then professor of Modern History at Manchester University, to attend the meetings that a number of Liberal Manchester businessmen had been having since 1918 to discuss the problems of industry. ..Muir was requested to produce a book, Liberalism and Industry....

...By early 1921 the Manchester Liberal Federation had not only adopted Muir's book as ‘a basis for the solution of the many social and industrial problems with which the nation is confronted’, but had successfully pressed its case for the adoption of a stance on industrial questions upon the NLF, as discussed in the previous chapter. Simon jotted down in his diary with justifiable pride: ‘I have been in close touch with Manchester Liberalism for the last few years—am responsible both for the production of Muir's book and (almost entirely) for the fact that the NLF is meeting today to adopt an industrial policy....

...In the summer of 1921 Simon organized a meeting on his farm in Herefordshire with Muir, Philip Guedalla, the liberal journalist, E. T. Scott, son of C. P. and future editor of the Manchester Guardian, and Colonel Tweed. The result was a preliminary summer school that met at Grasmere in September 1921. ...

...The Grasmere meeting, originally limited to fifty participants, nearly doubled that figure.18 The composition of the audience indicated (p.83) the future appeal of the LSS to younger liberals—a ‘League of Youth’, as Stuart Hodgson, the liberal editor, called it.19 No invitations were sent to party officials or MPs—a practice later abandoned as the LSS moved from periphery to centre. The strong Mancunian element was balanced by invitations to prominent liberals and progressives that included J. A. Hobson, R. H. Tawney, Eleanor Rathbone, the economists Walter Layton and D. H. Macgregor, W. H. Beveridge, and A. D. McNair, secretary to the Sankey Commission. Layton later recalled: ‘The backbone of the agenda was naturally Ramsay Muir's book. But even at Grasmere and in increasing volume in ensuing years the thinking of the Liberal Summer School was fed by a series of tributary streams, one or two of which ultimately became great rivers of thought.’20 Thus a dual pattern was set: not only did much British social policy thinking originate in the LSS, but it became the stage for unravelling different strands of post?war liberal theory.

...Following Grasmere the LSS settled down into a regular pattern, meeting alternately in Oxford and Cambridge. Muir and Layton were appointed joint directors of the School and a committee was formed to co?ordinate its work and prepare future summer sessions. Apart from the initiators, the committee included E. H. Gilpin, later co?opting Maurice Bonham?Carter, Major Crawfurd, H. D. Henderson, W. McG. Eagar, Hodgson, and Keynes. Simon was unrepentant about its functioning ‘in a thoroughly undemocratic way’; Muir considered it to be ‘a large and representative council’ despite the lack of elections. The committee held numerous small and private conferences which were not given publicity. ... in 1922 ... Two of the lectures are of particular interest: Layton's ‘The State and Industry’ reflected the general mood of the School on the possibility of radical reform, and was heartily endorsed by the liberal press.31 Many listeners found it ‘a stiff dose of gloom’.32 McNair's ‘The Problem of the Mines’ was important in a different sense—it marked the beginning of LSS ventures into policy proposals that eventually became central planks of the nationally acclaimed Liberal programmes and Reports. ...

McNair developed the ideas that had been unsuccessfully floated by the 1919 Sankey (Coal Industry) Commission. Though that commission had not spoken with one voice, all the commissioners had agreed on the need to transfer the control and possession of mineral rights to the state.35 The rejection of the recommendations by the Coalition government and the association of the Labour party point of view with outright nationalization cleared the way for pursuing what Layton termed a solution ‘on characteristically Liberal lines’.36 For McNair, indeed, the solution was ‘emphatically not the Nationalisation of the industry’.37 The mines would remain private; the coal itself and the royalties on it would be nationalized. The state would then be ‘placed in a strategic position for the control and development of this great national asset’,38 and would also determine leases to the mining companies. McNair and Layton could adopt these suggestions as ‘inspired by the Liberal point of view’39 because they combined two perspectives that were emerging as central to liberal thought in the 1920s. The state was the ultimate repository of responsibility for industrial affairs but it was simply not competent to undertake managerial as well as supervisory functions. ‘That is where’, McNair underlined, ‘we part company with our Socialist opponents.’40 As for joint control, measures on both the local and national levels were necessary, especially if some degree of profit?sharing with miners were to materialize. The war (p.87) may not have popularized state socialism but, in McNair's view, it certainly constituted a point of no return for the key coal?mining industry. Mining labour would never again be content with its subordinate position.41 Pre?war new liberalism had alternated between outright communal responsibility via the state and arrangements, such as national insurance, that shared responsibility among other bodies as well. For liberals such as McNair, the war had one main social and industrial lesson to impart—co?operation with the state, rather than exclusive state activity, was the only viable method. McNair's pluralistic notion of friendly partnership among the various units constituting a society was indeed a liberal one, but at the cost of abandoning hope for the impartial, benevolent, and efficient state the new liberals had sponsored. It is interesting therefore to note that the 1922 LSS also heard early mention of an idea that was increasingly to be suggested as an alternative institutional solution to balancing the public and the private domains. This was the public corporation on the Port of London Authority model, mooted by Muir and McNair as the proper method of undertaking an industrial or commercial concern on behalf of the community, by substituting Parliamentary for ministerial control.42

... 1923 was another important session in terms of producing a liberal ‘groundwork of thought and knowledge’.81 Gilbert Murray gave the inaugural address and others included Muir, McNair, Simon (in his first talk to the LSS), Henry Clay and H. A. L. Fisher. But the novelty lay in the first clear call to liberals from the group of Cambridge economists, Layton, D. H. Robertson and Keynes, their home ground inspiring them to a shared confidence. Robertson's message was simple: "Our remedial thought and effort must be directed not merely to providing stimulants for the depression, but sedatives for the boom. The whole matter is summed up in one word, a word which has become increasingly (p.95) fashionable in recent years, and which it seems to me that the Liberal Party in particular should adopt once for all as the first plank in its social policy—the word ‘stabilization’."

... the Cambridge economists were suggesting—to those liberals prepared to listen—new techniques for attacking some of the moral and social defects that liberals had identified, notably unemployment; they were proposing state intervention in order to facilitate that end, while recognizing the multi?faceted structure of the industrial and commercial worlds...

...By 1924 the LSS had entered on its second phase. The official leadership of the Liberal party now readily acknowledged its existence and, with the reunification of the party and the reemergence of Lloyd George, even its role as ‘think?tank’. ...It set up a research department with the help of the party organization,92 and began to play an active role in the preparation of the Liberal reports of the 1920s, the first of which was Coal and Power. Although the report, published in July 1924, appeared over Lloyd George's signature, liberals hastened to point out its intellectual pedigree, stretching from the Sankey Commission via McNair's LSS activities and pamphlet.93 Muir and Simon may have been less than accurate when they traced Coal and Power (and its later endorsement by the Samuel Commission in 1926) to Summer School discussions;94 nevertheless, the LSS had something to do with the dissemination of the proposals and with the creation of a favourable climate of opinion. It is also only fair to point out that the miners were adamant that nationalization of the mines was the only solution, while both Labour and Conservative governments simply ignored this.95 The report also made recommendations concerning the generation of electricity, similar to those on the mines, though the Nation believed that it might well be made the business of the state, as electricity was an area for large?scale operation.96 (talk) 15:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks, that looks like a very promising line of enquiry. DuncanHill (talk) 15:24, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Pleasure! (talk) 15:51, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
A McNair (The Problem of the Coal Mines) was Arnold McNair, 1st Baron McNair. He wrote for The Daily News, which was a Liberal paper. DuncanHill (talk) 22:02, 12 July 2019 (UTC)


  1. ^ Campbell, John (1077). "The First Labour Government, 1924". Lloyd George - The Goat in the Wilderness 1922-1931. London: Jonathan Cape. p. 96. ISBN 0224012967.

Solomon Islands' country code SB: why?Edit

Why does the Solomon Islands use a .sb TLD, ISO country code etc when the letter 'B' doesn't appear in its name? Amisom (talk) 15:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

A 'B' did appear in its name in 1974, when the codes were formulated. The country became independent in 1978 under its current name. See British Solomon Islands. (talk) 15:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
It happens. O'Hare Airport in Chicago is still ORD even though its name is no longer Orchard. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Northern Mariana Islands ISO code and US postal abbreviation MP: why?Edit

In the same vein... where does the P come from in the Northern Mariana Islands code? Were all the other codes starting with M already taken or something? -- (talk) 23:30, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Marianas Pacific, according to the article linked to by Theurgist above.-gadfium 00:57, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Is there another Marianas? Thanks, anyway. -- (talk) 05:43, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Well the second letter needed to be something, but MI as in "mariana islands" was already taken (though soon to be relinquished) by Midway Island. It couldn't be "MN" as in "Marianas North" since that was taken by Mongolia. I suppose they could have chosen NM as in "Northern Mariana", but, hey, I don't make the decisions. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:17, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Wouldn't work for the postal abbreviation, though. -- (talk) 20:13, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

When Serbia became independent in 2006, choosing a code turned out to be a difficult task as everything starting with S and containing another letter of the country's native or English name was taken. They eventually went for RS, after the country's full constitutional name.

Interesting what's going to happen if Scotland has to be assigned a code. If they wish to have one starting with S, the only completely untaken options would be SP, SQ and SW. --Theurgist (talk) 18:24, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

They could do what Serbia did and have KS -- if they want to be a kingdom, that is. -- (talk) 20:13, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Is there a place where I can find the rate of natural increase of countries without taking into account immigrant death?Edit

Wikipedia has this list:

The article say the rate of natural increase is defined as the crude birth rate minus the crude death rate. The problem is that while you don't take into account immigration (just crude birth rate), while talking about crude death rate, you take into account the immigrants that died. This creates a problem where immigration is not considered as a plus but if he dies he is considered a negative. Is there an place where I can find an version of this list that don't take into account the death of immigrants? (talk) 16:54, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I cannot think of one. I don't understand your concern, either. You mean that the death of an immigrant should counted as a departure, not a death? Gem fr (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Spawning in the country makes you not an immigrant by definition so there is an asymmetry (though they might be immigrants in non-demographic statistics senses like second generation or being allowed to stay). In some countries this won't effect much. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:37, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
My guess is that the OP is interested in figuring out the increase/decrease of the "native" population. That is, is the population growing "on its own", or is it only doing so as a result of immigration. The "problem" is that, once they immigrate, the immigrants are then part of the population and can only contribute to the number of deaths. And, of course, emigrants are not (and can only contribute to the number of births). I doubt immigrant death is tracked anywhere, but I'm thinking you could back into that value by applying the net immigration/emigration. Matt Deres (talk) 19:27, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Presuming that the immigrants reproduce after arrival, they contribute to the birth column as well as the death column. If you didn't count them in the death rate then the "natural increase" level would reflect what amounts to babies coming out of nowhere. (talk) 20:25, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
let's see... suppose a country has a number of immigrant each year, who all die in the country and never emigrate nor have children, while both immigrant and native populations are constant (as much death as birth for the native, as much immigrants in as immigrants dying). The "rate of natural increase" is negative, because of immigrants death, and population appears compensated by new immigrants (I can hear political sides "OMG there goes the The Great Replacement"/"see, you loser decadents? you need immigrants, be glad they come"). The "rate of natural increase without taking into account immigrant death" would be zero, but immigrants population seems to build up each years (while it actually stay the same), unless you count death of immigrants as an emigration. Yes, there is a problem here. Gem fr (talk) 20:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
If a diplomat gives birth abroad does the new human spawn there for population statistics purposes even if they use that special rule to prevent baby from becoming their citizen or national? Or does his parents' country get the natural increase? If someone gives birth on a cruise ship in the high seas where does the new human spawn? The first country of the first territorial waters the kid enters? The ship's flag of convenience? If kid leaves and goes home to his country of citizenship before the next year does he count as a natural increase for the tourist country, one of their emigrants and an immigrant to his own country all in the same year? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:07, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
"Spawn". I do not think this word means what you think it means. {The poster foremrly known as} (talk) 23:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Spawn in the video game sense. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:16, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Does that match any encyclopaedic sense? HiLo48 (talk) 04:40, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Spawning (gaming). For instance my spawn point was in the United States, that's usually a relatively easy level, Australia and Western Europe are even easier. As of 2019 most humans have gotten much harder spawn points like Iraq, pre-industrial or Somalia, those are Difficulty Level: Asian. If you got an easy life out of those you either had great luck of the draw or play the game of life very well. Donald Trump started in Queens, Obama started in Hawaii, one POTUS even started on a state border (his mom gave birth in nature while rushing to the nearest midwife or doctor or something like that and he popped out so close to the line no one will ever know which side). Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Useful information at Birth aboard aircraft and ships and [3]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:C708:8C00:B18A:406E:9654:B2B7 (talk) 11:08, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Denying bailEdit

In bail in the United States, the only reason given for having or denying bail is to make sure the person shows up for trial. Epstein is apparently considered a flight risk (that part makes perfect sense), so he's being held, but it's a big news story that his lawyers have asked for him to be put under house arrest instead. If the only reason to deny bail is to keep tabs on him, then house arrest with enough security monitoring would seem to handle it.

However, there is also an obvious concern that if he can go back to his fancy apartment, he can destroy any evidence there that the search team (the one that found the labelled cd's) might have missed. He can also communicate privately with his possible accomplices, blackmail targets, etc. There's a pretty obvious interest in preventing that. The premise of the prisoners' dilemma is that the prisoners haven't yet been tried, but they are still not allowed to communicate with each other.

My question: is there legal justification for keeping someone jailed pending trial, other than to make sure he doesn't flee the country? Bonus question: does the SDNY federal court have enough jurisdiction over the US Virgin Islands to order a search of Epstein's compound there, and if yes, why the heck haven't they done it? ObDisclaimers: not seeking legal advice, Epstein presumed innocent, Acosta only wanted to avoid a spectacle, blah blah. NY Mag article[4] about Epstein's island is amazing if you haven't seen it. (talk) 20:39, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

You must have missed this sentence in the article: "Legally, bail determination is based on four factors: seriousness of the crime, ties to the community, the flight risk posed by the defendant, and the danger posed by the defendant to his or her community." In this case in particular, there may even be a fifth criterion: the danger posed TO the defendant by his community. --Khajidha (talk) 21:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
US Virgin Islands are under FBI jurisdiction. Epstein having good lawyers is reason enough for some searching to be delayed (keeping in mind the searches may have been done without we still knowing it). Gem fr (talk) 21:37, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Epstein's charges were brought by the federal government. The U.S. government has jurisdiction throughout, well, the whole U.S. Any U.S. Attorney's office can apply for a search warrant to be served anywhere in the U.S. But, of course, search warrants have to be approved by a judge (a federal judge, in federal cases) who is convinced probable cause exists. As noted in the previous reply, warrants can be issued under seal until they are executed, which may take time, especially in complex cases. From what I've read, Epstein's arrest warrant was issued under seal, which is often done when the defendant is considered a flight risk, to prevent them from learning of the warrant and fleeing before they can be arrested. He was actually out of the country when the warrant was issued, and was arrested on return to the U.S.
A question occurred to me: for state charges, what's the typical procedure when the prosecution thinks there is relevant evidence in another state? A little searching pulled up this post on The Volokh Conspiracy. Apparently out-of-state search warrants aren't covered by the Full Faith and Credit Clause. It looks like the "proper" procedure is for State A to apply for a State B search warrant in State B's courts, but according to that post sometimes states will honor out-of-state search warrants although they aren't required to. Note this is different for arrest warrants; the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled states are bound to honor each others' arrest warrants (subject to a few limitations) under the Extradition Clause. -- (talk) 22:48, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I think in Epstein's case the probable cause for searching the USVI site is bloody obvious. They arrested him after all, and they searched his New York residence quite recently, and if I were them I'd be searching it much more thoroughly right now. I glossed over "danger to the community" thinking that Epstein would be closely watched enough to not commit more molestation directly while under house arrest. I was wondering more of the possibility of his destroying evidence or engaging in conspiracy while confined at home. Jailing him pre-trial for his own protection (protective custody) without his consent seems dubious. Yes, for state-to-state stuff if they don't get the FBI involved, I'd expect the local state's agency would have to coordinate with the other state's counterpart. (talk) 01:26, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

July 13Edit

The diversity visa lottery and screeningEdit

My dad previously told me that, in the past (15 years ago), if someone won the diversity visa lottery but was unable to complete their screening/background check in time, then they would not actually get a US green card. However, my dad also said that there has been a lawsuit (or more than one lawsuit) that changed the rules in regards to this and allowed diversity visa lottery winners to provisionally get their green card even if their screening/background check isn't actually completed--with the caveat that these winners could see their green card revoked if their screening/background check will find anything sufficiently suspicious about them later on.

Anyway, does anyone here know anything about this lawsuit/these lawsuits that apparently resulted in such a change? I tried Googling this but couldn't find any relevant information. Futurist110 (talk) 05:09, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Some information here: FBI Name Check#February 2008 USCIS policy change. 2A00:23C5:C708:8C00:B18A:406E:9654:B2B7 (talk) 10:48, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! That said, though, does anyone know why exactly this change was made? Was it the result of a lawsuit/lawsuits like my dad said? Or was it for some other reason--and if so, what reason? Futurist110 (talk) 20:25, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Italian connectionsEdit

Did TWA have any connections, such as hubs and/or focus cities, in Italy? (talk) 12:24, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

See Trans World Airlines#1980s. 2A00:23C5:C708:8C00:B18A:406E:9654:B2B7 (talk) 12:33, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
How about Pan Am? (talk) 12:45, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
According to List of Pan Am destinations... no. Blueboar (talk) 14:14, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much. (talk) 18:25, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

drawing by Leonardo da Vinci ("Studies of water, and a seated old man")Edit

"Studies of water, and a seated old man" (Melzi number 57)

What is the inscription on this drawing (original)? Looked around the web for about 20 minutes. Even the official website is not stating the words[5]... --Mateus2019 (talk) 17:30, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

See here (original and English translation). For comparison with the original, you can view the inverted text here, and that site also gives a more modern Italian translation. (Can't link directly. Just click on "TESTO INVERTITO" for the inverted text, and "TRADUZIONE DEL TESTO" for the translation). (talk) 21:43, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Have you seen that bloody Leonardo da Vinci cartoon? DuncanHill (talk) 22:11, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
@ Thank you very much! --Mateus2019 (talk) 08:14, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

July 14Edit

Pro-research help needed for Harry HayEdit

Hi again, I’ve started my final edits on possible content of Harry Hay’s involvement with NAMBLA. You can see it here.

I’ve seen only a few characterize him as being an advocate for the group, and those seem to have little or no support for their assertion. I can’t tell if the subject is too taboo for publications to deal with, too complex—as Hay seems only to talk about his experience, and theories that gay people should avoid assimilation, or something else.

Anyone have good sources that speak to him being an advocate for NAMBLA in any depth?

All help appreciated! Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:53, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

first: it is NOT OK to link toward your "possible content" without linking Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#NAMBLA_content_on_Harry_Hay and Talk:Harry_Hay#Pedophile_/_NAMBLA_advocacy. The matter is extensively discussed where it should. Don't expect from the ref desk another outcome.
Obviously, the article is just choke full of good sources that speak to him being an advocate for NAMBLA. Probably too much, actually, considering he was a supporter, not a member. It seems to me you act as if good source were source telling good things; this is just not true. Because a source tell things that upsets you do not turn them into bad source.
If NAMBLA is possibly the most hated group imaginable to many LGBTQ people, obviously, Hay wasn't one of those "many LGBTQ people".
And it seems that he was unafraid to stand against any establishment, including LGBTQ's. So I am not sure he would approve of your move.
So may be you should just let it go.
Now, I am not sure that the issue needs a whole paragraph in the intro, may be a single sentence would be enough for someone who was an active supporter, not a member, and who dedicated only a small part of his activities to NAMBLA. He probably was supporter of many groups, of which NAMBLA was just one. So may be, instead, you should look for other groups he also supported.
Gem fr (talk) 17:01, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
No intent to mislead was intended at all. The sourcing on the Hay article for this content currently is dismal, as is the spin on them, that is the problem. After trying to address the issue initially, I started to do a survey of what I could find. Which remains very little. He was indeed not a member and said that he was never inclined to be one. I’m not yet even seeing he was an advocate for the group as much as he was for himself. His time in talking supposedly about them was instead all about his one coming of age story. If he did something else I would report it.
If I found he was indeed an avowed advocate, I might be surprised but I would dutifully report exactly that. Ditto whatever else I find. What I have so far is there, including Hay’s reasons for doing what he did. I may not fully understand or agree with him but I feel his own thoughts as noted in RS should be included.
My concern, and the reason I’m asking for help, is that my bias might be in the way of me finding better sources, ones that spell out how he is perceived as, or actually was a true advocate for the group. Any help in getting to the facts on this is appreciated. Gleeanon409 (talk) 19:39, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
Man, if someone who speak on behalf of a banned group, plea to have them included, and wear banner "the group march with me" when he doesn't succeed, is not an advocate, who is? Unless you mean "true advocate" like some mean "true Scotsman"... Gem fr (talk) 20:24, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
Putting aside the understandable emotions generated by the subject matter here, there is a distinction between advocating that a group be included, and advocating for the views of the group. I took a glance at Harry Hay and am not sure that this distinction comes across. If he did advocate for the views of the group, then that should be called out separately and sourced. Otherwise, the claim that he was an advocate for the group needs to be qualified and explained. --Trovatore (talk) 20:32, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
Advocacy for the group Vs advocacy for the view of the group? Sound like nitpicking to me. Anyway, Hay told that gay boys, including by his own experience, longed for older man taking care of them. Gem fr (talk) 23:48, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
The distinction between advocating that someone should be heard, versus advocating that someone is actually right, is not nitpicking at all. It is utterly fundamental. --Trovatore (talk) 23:58, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
I’ve included the facts already in my proposed content, his reasoning seems to be he’s not so invested in them being included or not, but that he felt the LGBTQ communities needed to have a discussion on the issues themselves—rather than have “the heteros” dictate who belongs—before any group who identify as lesbian or gay was banned. He might have felt there was both: interference from outside forces; and a judgement without any trial. Or that could be oversimplification.
I’m guessing the current sources on the article are there as examples, while a couple state he was but offer no reasoning beyond he protested them being banned from two high-profile community parades.
If he was engaged in pro-pedophile advocacy, or pro-NAMBLA advocacy, we should document it. But to accuse him without evidence doesn’t help, and distracts from addressing the actual cases of people who are engaged in those activities, or any child abuse.
In any case I need content to reflect the sources, and I’m hoping there is better sources out there. Gleeanon409 (talk) 20:51, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
nuff said from me. I repeat: The matter is extensively discussed where it should [talk page]. Don't expect from the ref desk another outcome. Gem fr (talk) 23:48, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
I appreciate your feedback. Getting a different result—actual sources that confirm the assertion he was an advocate—is exactly what I hope will happen here, apparently the purpose of this board. Gleeanon409 (talk) 17:15, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Anyone actually able to help with reference(s). Gleeanon409 (talk) 17:15, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

When was the first time a nation became unsustainable without food imports or diaspora/colonizing?Edit (talk) 18:27, 14 July 2019 (UTC) -- In ancient times, mainland Greece and its closely-associated islands had a limited amount of farmland which could only produce a limited amount of food according to ancient agricultural practices, and so had a limited carrying capacity to support a human population (of course, the limiting factor was food produced during a year of bad harvest). Greek responses to this included female infanticide, importing grain from various areas (such as the Black Sea coasts), and founding overseas colonies (emigration).
In modern times, the first major world power not to be self-sufficient in basic staple foodstuffs was probably Britain in the 19th century. This added special bitterness on the UK side to the UK-German naval rivalry of the end of the 19th century and the 20th century leading up to WW1... AnonMoos (talk) 04:45, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
"In the course of the second half of the eighteenth century Great Britain virtually ceased to be self-sufficient in grain...". [6] Alansplodge (talk) 17:57, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
You skip over the Roman Empire, but it was also dependent on import of foodstuffs, particularly grains from North Africa. --Xuxl (talk) 12:27, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
The population of the city of Rome was certainly dependent on grain shipments from Egypt and the province of "Africa" (today's northern Tunisia and northeastern Algeria), but I don't think that applied to the Roman empire as a whole... AnonMoos (talk) 13:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
The roman Empire was not a nation, it was an Empire. North Africa and Egypt were indeed Rome bread-brackets, but they were part of the Empire
From the very beginning, every city has been dependent on the countryside for food. Rome was no special in that.
"colonizing" is the normal mode of operation for living things, human included
No one could live in most of Earth without importing salt, and this predate writing and the establishment of nation. So the answer is : from day one, probably; from time immemorial for sure.
See also: timeline of international trade
Gem fr (talk) 13:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
If you live by the sea, or near a brine spring, you can make your own salt. See Salt History - Roman Times. Alansplodge (talk) 18:24, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
yes; but even in such case, you are better off buying it from people specializing in salt production because they have better condition, while you have better condition to produce something they need. Gem fr (talk) 21:54, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Gem_fr -- Salt is an inorganic mineral, not an agricultural staple foodstuff, so it's a somewhat different case. Humans need a much smaller amount of salt each day than of nutritional food, and salt doesn't go bad over time if stored with some degree of care. In the great majority of cases throughout world history before the rise of railroads in the 19th century, it simply wasn't cost-effective to ship grain any substantial distance by land transport (as opposed to by seas, rivers, or canals) -- but the same was not true of salt. And so on... AnonMoos (talk) 05:09, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
salt being inorganic, and required in relative low quantity, doesn't stop it to be food for humans and their herd. You don't feed on grain only, you'll need protein and fat (cheese, ham and other salted/dried meat/fish, herds that would be slaughtered near the city, oil...), and you'll want wine, beer, or whatever drinkable stuff (of which, water is NOT, unless you want to die quickly and painfully). Salt (spices, oil and wine also somewhat share these features) is universal, could travel far, high value/weight, was taxed (which left records), and hence much more known than other foodstuff, but it is a safe bet that other foodstuff, which left fewer records, shared the routes. And, then gain, this include cattle to be slaughtered. There are reasons to think that the huge, hundred or even thousand of km, cattle land transport (on foot) from the prairies to Chicago or Pampa to Buenos Aires, was practiced in Roman and Babylonian times, and even before any recording (Transhumance).Gem fr (talk) 09:06, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
So this question ends up being answered by the question: what is a "nation"? Is a Greek city state a nation? Is the Roman empire a nation? Is Roman Italy a nation? Is the Latium a nation? Is the British Empire a single nation? depending on your definition, you have different answers to the original question --Lgriot (talk) 17:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
No, my answer is : from day one. Because, humans had to trade food from strangers before cities, nations (whatever definition you use), and writing. This doesn't depend on a definition of nation. Gem fr (talk) 18:12, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Lgriot -- the British empire was probably self-sufficient in basic agricultural staple foodstuffs as long as it included Canada. It's the island of Britain which wasn't (and isn't) self-sufficient. AnonMoos (talk) 21:28, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

To swear on one's genitalsEdit

I was surprised to find in our article on sexuality in ancient Rome a reference to swearing on one's genitals. I thought that was a Hebrew thing! (Cf instances of people in the Old Testatment swearing euphemistically on/under one's thighs.) I like compare/contrast stuff between Jewish and Roman ideas. Is there a name for this practice? I mean this is "a thing" in history and maybe there should be an article? Temerarius (talk) 19:44, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, that article says Some ancient Mediterranean cultures swore binding oaths upon the male genitalia, and the reference given does point to examples in Genesis; it doesn't say it was a Roman thing. Etymonline asserts (without reference) that Stories that trace the use of the Latin word to some supposed swearing-in ceremony are modern and groundless.. HenryFlower 20:19, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
EO has this to say about "testimony".[7]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:30, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
John Ayto's Dictionary of Word Origins (Bloomsbury 1990) concurs, and further traces Latin testis 'witness' to the reconstructed prehistoric Indo-European base *tris 'three', implying a 'third person' who could be a disinterested witness to an agreement.
As for the 'testicle' connection, the word is an English coinage of the 15th century (both Ayto and EO say) which carries the sense that the testes (Latin plural of testis) "'bear witness' to a man's virility." EO specifically dismisses the notion of a Roman swearing ceremony as a modern invention, and mentions the possible connection of testis to testa 'pot', which I believe is also the origin of French tête via Vulgar Latin slang. {The poster fomerly known as} (talk) 17:46, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
See also A “Witness” and a “Testicle”? A Linguistic Analysis of the Latin Word “Testis” which gives some background to this theory, apparently the suggestion of classicist and linguist Joshua Katz in 1998. Alansplodge (talk) 18:06, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Not quite swearing on them, but among my male friends when I was a lot younger it was fairly common for someone certain something would happen to say they would bet their balls on it. Can't find a precise source, but this [8] comes close. HiLo48 (talk) 03:53, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
To bet one's ass/arse is also well-known. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 04:21, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
True. Is it just an Australian thing? Or more global? Perhaps a British thing too? HiLo48 (talk) 04:24, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
The idiom is well known in North American varieties of English. --Jayron32 15:53, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
As documented in the film Blazing Saddles.Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:03, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

July 15Edit

Lady Wimborne's Hospital at UskubEdit

Our article Lancelot Barrington-Ward says that in the First World War he was Surgeon-in-Chief to Lady Wimborne's Hospital at Uskub. I would like to know more about Lady Wimborne and her hospital, thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 00:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC) - I've just changed Wimburne to Wimborne, there was a typo in our article. DuncanHill (talk) 00:34, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I suspect this is Lady Cornelia Henrietta Maria Guest, Baroness Wimborne, 1847-1927. She was born Cornelia Henrietta Maria Spencer-Churchill, and married Sir Ivor Bertie Guest (1st Baron Wimborne) in 1868. She set up a Serbian Relief Fund in 1915. - Nunh-huh 01:40, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, yes that must be her - mentioned here in the National Archives ("Members of Serbian Relief Fund Units sent to Serbia (including Lady (Ralph) Paget's Hospital; Cornelia Lady Wimborne's Hospital; Mrs Stobart's Hospital; 1st British Farmers' Hospital; 2nd British Farmers' Hospital)"), and here with a portrait. She had already set up a hospital in Poole. DuncanHill (talk) 08:42, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
More details of the organisation (mainly Lady Paget's) at Great War Forum - Serbian Relief Fund Hospital. Alansplodge (talk) 09:10, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
The Serbian hospital is also mentioned in this book: "...the second Serbian Relief Fund Unit, the Winborne unit--so named because Lady Cornelia Wimborne had raised the funds for it--had already gone out to Skoplje..."
Lots of her letters reprinted in various biographies of Winston Churchill, and she seems to have written to the editor lots too, about church issues - she had a "league for combating the introduction of ritualism into English Church"[9]. This one has a bit about her personality; she is portrayed as kind, generous and a peacemaker.
Brief biography in [10] if you can get WP:RX to access full version for you. Here's Burke's Peerage entry (mother of nine). She lived at Canford Manor until 1923 [11] and she had built 111 cottages for estate workers there [12] [13].
Also keep seeing her in agricultural news, in some of those random bits that make historical research so fun: enthusiastic about rabbits and "has several greenhouses filled with hutches". Her herd of cows wins a trophy from the Dorset Milk Recording Society in 1921. Her husband had donated the trophy. Wasn't that a Downton Abbey plot? (talk) 18:32, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Splendid work again! Very much appreciated. DuncanHill (talk) 20:30, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
You ask the most fun questions :) (talk) 13:53, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

July 16Edit

German wifiEdit

Four questions:

1) What happened to the Wikipedia travel reference desk? I know there is a wikivoyage reference desk, but not a Wikipedia one.

2)Is free wifi now widespread in Germany? I heard that free wifi was scarce there three years years ago because of a law that is no longer in effect. Basically, not a lot of places provided free wifi because wifi providers were liable if people used their network to download pirated material. Wondering this because I am trying to decide if I can get by just using WhatsApp on my phone at wifi spots if I need to make phone calls. I'm trying to avoid roaming fees, which are high for my plan. I would rather do that instead of purchasing an sim card or a disposable cell phone.

Is free wifi widespread in the Netherlands outside of Amsterdam, say in Rotterdam or Utrecht? What about Switzerland? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

In answer to your first question, there has never been a Wikipedia travel reference desk. Questions on travel go in misc. --Viennese Waltz 07:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The page Wikipedia:Reference desk lists the reference desks, and one in the list is "Travel", with the description "Desk administered by sister project Wikivoyage (External Link)" IIRC, "Travel" used to also have a link in the upper right of each desk. Loraof (talk) 16:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Free wifi is fairly widespread over most of Europe. But generally you will need to gain the password. In most establishments in Europe, the password will be either written on a wall, on the menu; near the cash register or on the menu or on the table. Wifi is generally available free of charge is most public establishments like restaurants and coffee shops, but it is rarely any good. The connection is often slow and unreliable. Anton (talk) 08:21, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes, free wi-fi is now the rule rather than the exception in cafés in Europe, but I disagree that it is "rarely any good". I hardly ever experience a bad connection in a café or bar. That issue you had with liability is no longer an issue (if indeed it ever was) because you always have to tick a box to accept their terms and conditions before you can go online. You can also sometimes find hotspots in public places like parks, but that kind of provision is not particularly widespread or reliable. As for making phone calls, despite what I said above, I would still be tempted to buy a local SIM card rather than rely on Whatsapp and wi-fi. Although I note that you are in the US so check whether your phone is compatible with European sim cards, you might have to buy a cheap disposable phone as you suggest. --Viennese Waltz 08:34, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Agree with most things. Free WiFi is also available in fast long-distance train (ICE), and on many local light-rail networks now. That said, a local prepaid card is as little as EUR 7,99 for one month including a decent data plan, and you can buy extra data contingents rather cheaply. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 03:55, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Destinations of a defunct Swiss national airlineEdit

I'm trying to find a list of destinations where Swissair flew before they ceased operations in 2002. Where's a good place to start? (talk) 11:57, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Here is an archived page from the old Swissair website, dating from January 2002. Does that help? --Viennese Waltz 13:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much.2604:2000:7104:2F00:2C7B:C50E:77FE:EECC (talk) 19:36, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Thomas Tobias (Tobiaszoon)Edit

A draft article

Thomas Tobias (Tobiaszoon) (born(1630s?)Ireland), was a famous Irish Roman Catholic sea captain of the mid 17th century who served as an officer in both the English Navy and Dutch Confederate Navy before and during the Second and Third Anglo-Dutch Wars.

Tobias is first mentioned as being an officer under Admiral Edward Spraage (also an Irishman) (1)

Tobias is later mentioned prominently during the Four Days Battle of 1666 as leading the action against the 60gun English "greatship" Swiftsure , taking her a prize and given subsequent command of her and the prize crew responsible for repairing her and conveying her back to Amsterdam where she was upgraded to 70 guns and renamed the Oudshoorn.(2)

Tobias was the "flag captain" of the 80 gun Dutch flagship Hollandia under Lieutenant Admiral Van Ghent from 1666-1667. (4)

Tobias is noted for his valor during the famous Dutch Attack up the Thames River estuary (Raid on the Medway) in June 1667. During the battle he was aboard Lieutenant-Admiral Baron Willem Joseph van Ghent's frigate Agatha and charged with the reduction of the intentionally sunken English warships as an obstacle preventing the Dutch from continuing upriver.(1)

Subsequently he was ordered to lead the attack on the 80gun English flagship Royal Charles . After the ship was taken as a prize, Tobias was charged to take command of the ship and prize crew in order to prepare it for the sea passage to the Netherlands. Tobias was required to further reduce the obstacles of sunken ships to allow the deep draft English capital ship to proceed out of the estuary. He then sailed the ship to Amsterdam where it became a great spectacle.(1)

During the Third Anglo-Dutch War, Tobias was captain of the 50gun Dutch man-o-war Beschermer (built 1665). He also served as Admiral Cornelis Tromp's "flag captain" in several actions. His son Jan Thomas Tobiaszoon was also registered as an able seaman aboard Tromp's flagship. (3)

Tobias is last mentioned in 1673/4 as the captain of the 58gun Dutch frigate Geloof during Admiral DeRuyter's second punitive expedition to the Caribbean and his attack on French Martinique.(2) The Geloof was noted to have taken several prizes during the expedition. 58gun Dutch frigate "Geloof" (from V&A collection: )

The Dutch historian Dr. Japp R. Bruijn also mentions that Thomas Tobias and Michel DeRuyter were close neighbors and friends. Early in DeRuyter's career he had been a merchant captain often trading in Ireland and was noted to be fluent in Irish. Bruijn estimates that eight percent of seamen serving in the Dutch Navy during the 17th century Anglo-Dutch wars were from the British Isles with a majority of those from Ireland. (1)


1. DeRuyter: Dutch Admiral, Edited by Japp R. Bruijn, Ronald Prud'homme van Reine and Rolof van Hovell tot Westerflier

2. Dutch Warships in the Age of Sail 1600-1714 by James Bender

3. The Dutch Navy of the Seventeeth and Eighteenth Centuries by Jaap R. Bruijn

4. Wikipedia:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaron R Shields (talkcontribs) 17:40, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

What's your question? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:59, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Aaron R Shields, this is a good start at your draft. Take a look at the edit I made to the line about Edward Spragge - it shows you how to link to other wikipedia articles and how to format references. You can do this for the rest of the links and references in your draft.
Is there anything you feel is unsourced and that you need help finding sources for? That is what this place is for. If you let us know what you need to find out we can help you. (talk) 19:17, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
And be sure to check your user talk page (User talk:Aaron R Shields) -- there's some helpful advice and useful links. — (talk) 22:59, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

July 17Edit

G. O. Number: 85Edit


Any idea what the above means? (From here), relating to Hiroshi H. Miyamura. Presumably, it is US military related. "General Order" seems to be a red herring. For some reason, search engine query points to: Service number (United States Army), but I can't find anything directly relevant there. Any ideas? ... Also, I can't find what his middle name is ("H."). Thanks in advance, — (talk) 03:47, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

It's "General Order". This is Miyamura's. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 04:29, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! — (talk) 14:51, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Significant Pre-Columbian structures in US/Canada?Edit

Are the Mississippian mounds (largest being Cahokia) the most significant structures to still exist in the US(Non-Hawaii)/Canada constructed prior to 1492? Is there a belief that there were more significant constructed which have been destroyed in between 1492 and now? Does the answer change at all if the part of Mexico north of an East-West line through the southern tip of Texas is considered instead? Does Hawaii change this?

If Cahokia is the most significant, are there other similarly sided areas of the world (>5% of the world area) equally lacking similar historical surviving structures (and were similar not constructed or not survive?)Naraht (talk) 18:55, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

In Northern America, there are the pueblos and the cliff-dwellings in the southwest and the mounds in the mid-west. If you want something architecturally bigger or more impressive, then you're pretty much out of luck. Part of the reason, is that along the anthropological typology of band–tribe-chiefdom-state, pre-Columbian Northern American peoples didn't advance much beyond the incipient state level. The reason why well-consolidated states, true cities, and multinational empires didn't develop could be due to ecological reasons -- the Southwest has somewhat limited and dispersed agricultural land, while the eastern half of the U.S. didn't have a good staple agricultural crop until maize (corn) was adapted to the climate there around 900 A.D. (with probably too little time left for populations to become denser and centralized political traditions to form). AnonMoos (talk) 19:07, 17 July 2019 (UTC)