Humanities desk
< September 9	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 11 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

September 10[edit]

Colard, Belgium[edit]

Somewhere near Liege [1]

Is it a spelling error? can anyone find it.Sf5xeplus (talk) 00:28, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a Colard-Seraing labeled at 50°36′27″N 5°31′09″E / 50.6074°N 5.5192°E on Google Maps, right next to what appears to be a coal mine labeled with the name of the company in question. Deor (talk) 03:27, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And entering "Chaussee de la Hulpe" in Google Earth points to the railway station at

50°47′41.82″N 4°24′30.13″E / 50.7949500°N 4.4083694°E, with the street to the east. Rojomoke (talk) 07:10, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, it must be Colard-Seraing .

Resolved

Roman Admiration/Adoption of Greek Culture[edit]

Why were the Romans so strongly influenced by Greek culture? They conquered countless people (including the Greeks in the Battle of Corinth) but no other culture seemed to have an impact quite like the Greeks. Why didn't the Teutons and Cimbris in the Cimbrian War have a similar influence? TheFutureAwaits (talk) 11:59, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why would they? To the Romans, the Teutons and Cimbri were barbarians. The Greeks were much more advanced. The height of Greek civilization occurred when Rome was a village of wooden huts. There were Greek colonies near Rome, and they had laws, literature, architecture, technology, even something as simple as an alphabet. It's the same reason the Germanic and Gallic tribes later copied the Romans. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:38, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TheFutureAwaits -- The Romans were also significantly influenced by Etruscan culture... AnonMoos (talk) 18:11, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And some of the original Greek influence came indirectly through the Etruscans (who were also rather backwards compared to the nearby Greek colonies and were just as impressed by them as the Romans were). Adam Bishop (talk) 18:50, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

THe Romans respected the Etruscans and the Greeks because they were civilised.
Sleigh (talk) 00:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On of Rome's two prominent foundtion myths was that it was founded by Greeks. Besides the more famous "Romulus and Remus" myth there is the story told in the Aeneid, that Rome was founded by the defeated Trojans after the Trojan War. While Virgil popularized the story, Aeneas's story was already counted as a popular founding myth of Rome. --Jayron32 02:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aeneas did not found the city of Rome; he settled in and/or founded Lavinium, while his son founded Alba Longa. AnonMoos (talk) 15:14, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

QI[edit]

I was watching an episode of QI on Dave and they said that in Katanonian Christmas scenes with jesus and the manger, there is always a man in the back dedicating? Is that true? My google searches have revealed little evidence Minky543 (talk) 13:50, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you mean "Catalonian" and "defecating", they might have been talking about the Caganer (see article). ---Sluzzelin talk 13:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Beat me to it!) I remember the QI episode, yes it is the Caganer in Catalonian nativity scenes. DuncanHill (talk) 13:57, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Holy shit! —Kevin Myers 14:10, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[2] Quadrupedaldiprotodont (talk) 14:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Thank you. I'll be here all week." —Kevin Myers 14:51, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please help: My husband doesn't understand me; I have PTSD and was sexually abused from age 2-12[edit]

Wikipedia does not give medical advice. Please see your physician for a recommendation to a therapist

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We were married 1 month ago. My husband wanted to look me over, naked, after I asked him not to and told him I needed to wear something. On our wedding night he still insisted and I let him because I felt like I had to, but I felt like I was out of myself and all of my desires for him, sexually, fell completely aside. He takes things personally even though I have explained to him what happened to me. To his credit, He did take time to read to me from the Bible the book of Song of Songs and explained that they had to be looking at one another in order to make the descriptions they made. One night he continued to play with my nipples after I asked him to stop and because I guess I was set back to being like I was when I was a child, even though I was giggling while I kept saying no, I held my breast tightly all night to keep him from me and the next day when I felt myself again, I told him that no means no no matter what and he was offended. I'm not very good at explaining things to him, either, esp., since he said I talked to him as if he was a child. After we took a couple weeks off (Help was there due to a bladder infection) and so that we were not expecting me to have any sex and we agreed that I would be the one to initiate things after our intrastate move was over (me in a new state with him)I finally felt comfortable and interested in having sex one night, then he began touching me and asking for sex the next morning after waking me up and I had a head ache and the sun was even hurting my eyes. I reminded him of that pack we made and he appeared to me that he was offended again, which seems to me like he distances himself from me. Is there a book / article out there somewhere or something that he can read to help him understand me? I pray so hard for some help here, because he is a very good man and I love him very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brokenwoman78910 (talk • contribs) 14:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but Wikipedia can not give medical (including psychological) advice. please consult a psychologist (your personal physician may be able to recommend one). --Ludwigs2 14:19, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Typically, a psychiatrist (a doctor) is consulted, and not a psychologist (a scientist). Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:48, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this the last time somebody (Ludwigs?) appeared to confuse the two professions; but then I read the "Contrast with psychiatrist" section of psychologist, and wasn't so sure any more. 213.122.55.221 (talk) 17:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should seek advice from a Psychiatrist or therapist. They will be able to help you far better than random people on the internet can Quadrupedaldiprotodont (talk) 14:30, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Congress ratification of treaties[edit]

U.S. Presidents have a nice tradition. They may sign an international treaty and leave the houses not to ratify it. The prime minister or premiere of a parliamentary system country always belong to the majority party. Will they treat treaties with more honor? --Toytoy (talk) 14:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily. Australia was a party to the kyoto protocol for many years without actually ratifying it. Seperation of powers in parliamentary democracies means that, just like the US a treaty has to get through the houses of parliament. Often treaties are signed for diplomatic reasons then not implemented or implemented poorly for local political reasons. 124.171.201.251 (talk) 14:36, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But our beloved Aussies finally ratified KP. Only the U.S. still fails to ratify it. Well, 2012 is coming soon ... -- Toytoy (talk) 14:43, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that this is a matter of honor. Probably the most famous example is the US Senate's failure to ratify the League of Nations treaty; Woodrow Wilson was an enthusiastic promoter of the League, made it a centerpiece of his policy, and toured the country to try to raise support; but Wilson's opponents in the Senate were able to defeat the moves to ratify the treaty. Was Wilson dishonorable to sign the treaty? That's nonsense. However, there's something far dodgier under US law: see Medellín v. Texas, in which it was ruled in 2008 that a treaty has to be "self-executing", or else it's not actually binding domestic law, even if it was ratified by the Senate. Hopefully all future treaties will be phrased to be "self-executing" before being signed by the President and then presented to the Senate for ratification. Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:34, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, Wilson probably could have got the League of Nations treaty through, if he had been willing to accept a number of statements of reservations and limitations that Congress would have attached to it. As for the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, the thing is that it was the US federal government which signed and ratified it, but in the vast majority of cases its obligations are binding on the individual states (not on the federal government itself) -- and under the U.S. constitution, the federal government cannot directly order state governments to do things which fall into the sphere allocated to the authority of the state governments (only the federal courts can do that). The most the congress or president could do is cut off some federal law enforcement funding allocated to the states to supplement state budgets (something which would be politically unpopular, and might not have the desired effect). AnonMoos (talk) 18:05, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One clarification: only the Senate is required to ratify treaties in the U.S. The House of Representatives gets no say in the matter. See Treaty Clause. —D. Monack ^talk 22:13, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Victim of fanaticism - Search for a painting[edit]

Dear Wikipedia editors,

We have a deep interest in the Ukraine painter, Nikolai Pimonenco, and spacific in his painting "victim of fanaticism".

We sow on the entry "History of the Jews in Russia" the painting with a little explanation about it, and we want to know if you know more about it, and spacific - which museum does it presents in.

Thanks a lot for your time and you efforts,

Aviv ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.199.151.40 (talk) 14:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, it is located in the Kharkiv Art Museum. Here is some more info. I couldn't find it on the museum's own website, but maybe someone else can. ---Sluzzelin talk 15:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia his name is Mykola Pymonenko. I've linked to Wikipedia's image of the painting -- the File page contains some information about it, but I can't read most of it. Looie496 (talk) 16:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From the look of the clothes it looks like a poor vilage inhabited by eastern european jews. The young woman is probably about to be cast out of the village for getting pregnant while not being married or for having an affair with a married man. I recommend reading the book Chłopi, which earned Władysław Reymont a Nobel prize in literature if you are interested in such eastern european, village climates. 87.207.53.174 (talk) 03:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Berlin pre-war buildings[edit]

I am interested in knowing how many pre-World War II buildings exist today in Berlin. I read that only Goring's Air Ministry building survived the Allied bombings and Russian shelling. Could somebody please confirm this? Thank you.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean 1933-1945 buildings, or pre-1945 buildings generally? -- AnonMoos (talk) 17:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

see Detlev-Rohwedder-Haus --Bgfx (talk) 17:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The monument to Catherine The Great is intact in the centre of the Main Street: Unter den Linden, ending then in the Brandenburg Gate, seen by me in 1969! MacOfJesus (talk) 23:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you keep going past the Brandenburg Gate, the next thing is the Reichstag building, which dates from 1894... although, as the article says, it was seriously damaged and was out of use for decades. But the original poster said "How many buildings?", not "Which buildings?" Perhaps this was a request for statistics, not for a list. --Anonymous, 21:40 UTC, September 11 (speaking of damaged buildings...), 2010.

If I were to do that, then, instead of going through Check point charlie, and suffering constant survalance, I would not be here now! Then, was the height of the Cold War! (Statistics usually begin with a list of some sort, I think.). -- MacOfJesus (talk) 13:17, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

gov.[edit]

i just put up a post on her titled gov. where is it its gone —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomjohnson357 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it. It had nothing to do with humanities. You have been warned about asking questions in the wrong place several times already. Looie496 (talk) 18:26, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thi is the gov section. you are a vandal. i will put it back up —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomjohnson357 (talk • contribs) 18:32, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is Humanities, not what is the New York department for environmental conservation laws? -- kainaw ™ 18:36, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

its under politics —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomjohnson357 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As we do not have a "what is the New York department for environmental conservation laws refdesk", either of humanities of misc would seem appropriate for the question, to me. I'm uncertain what crusade Looie496 is on, but suggest he or she is misguided. Neither did he or she have the good grace to alert the OP to the removal of their question. That's just rude. Finally, in the event that Tomjohnson357 is a troll - and I know of no evidence pointing this way - then at best he has had a very good feed indeed, which still makes the removal counterproductive. WOuld it not have ben as easy to give a one line answer, such as "your congressman" or other legislative assembly representative? --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:43, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i agree —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomjohnson357 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, the answer is that New York State has multiple governmental agencies with responsibility for environmental protection or conservation, and links to them are available here. Particularly relevant to the question, of course, is the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. John M Baker (talk) 02:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

gov 2[edit]

who can i write to to complain about oil paint being outlawed in ny? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomjohnson357 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Department of Environmental Conservation (stated above). -- kainaw ™ 19:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

they didnt outlaw it though —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomjohnson357 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The State Assembly would have passed the law, so if you want someone actually responsible for passing the law, you would contact your local assemblyman/woman. If you want someone responsible for enforcing the law, you would contact the agency named by Kainaw. --Jayron32 01:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

De-sanctification of Barbara?[edit]

According to the article titled Saint Barbara, she "was removed from the liturgical calendar of the Roman rite in 1969." No source is cited. I seem to recall that a long list of saints were removed from the calendar simultaneously at about that time. Was this one of those? Is there any account of that event in Wikipedia or elsewhere on the web? Michael Hardy (talk) 19:42, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I'd ask about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism, since it could be accompanied by a suggestion that some information be added to the article, but it seems rare that anyone ever looks at that page. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can read Paul VI's motu proprio on the matter, although he is referring to an earlier council decision (which I'm sure must be available somewhere too). Adam Bishop (talk) 21:23, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know much about it, except that the most famous of the delistees was probably Saint Christopher... AnonMoos (talk) 22:59, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Catholic calendar of saints#General Roman Calendar is relevant. Deor (talk) 14:32, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That particular motu proprio caused headlines in newspapers all over the world. There should be a Wikipedia article about it, and it should be linked from Saint Barbara and other such articles. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:11, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a stub article: Mysterii Paschalis. Michael Hardy (talk) 20:55, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

opening a rehab center[edit]

in order to open and run a rehab center what areas of knowledge should i major in university? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.187.90.159 (talk) 20:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never having even been in a rehab center, I may be off a bit but my first thought would be psychology. Dismas|^(talk) 21:36, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It depends exacly what role you want to do. Running a rehab centre is more of an administrator/management job. Being closely involved with the clients needs more of a background in sociology or social work. Why not check out what qualifications are needed for jobs in this area? Here in the UK, The Guardian newspaper has good jobs pages for this kind of work (see here for example), but I'm sure there are sources of similar information in your country. Astronaut (talk) 04:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might also find the article Qualifications for professional social work useful. Astronaut (talk) 04:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More specific needed. Animal rehab center? Cleaning oil from birds wings and releasing them back into the wild? Or people rehab center for junkies? 14:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quadrupedaldiprotodont (talk • contribs)

What's the catch?[edit]

I received an email offer by the wording of:

“

Hello,

If you can spare 6 to 18 hours a week, possess some experience working on a computer and have an internet access, you can actually start working with us and begin to earn extra money. It is a part-time job and you can do it according to your own schedule. The job includes mostly survey completing and giving your opinion about different products. Everything you do, you do it online. All you need is just computer with internet connection.

If you are interested, contact me by my work email: <email removed> and I will send you further information.

”

When I replied asking how much it would pay, I got a templated reply directing me to a link which redirected here. Now, while the prospect of some money from this (although I highly doubt the claimed potential of $3-5k a month) seems desirable, something about this feels like it has a catch of some kind to it. What is likely to be the catch for participating at the website I linked? Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 20:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are many websites (SponsorPay and Super Rewards are two) that pay you small amounts to do surveys, although only small amounts. I guess if you were doing surveys really fast all day long for a month you would earn a couple of k, but most likely you only earn like $5 for doing many surveys. Often they don't even have surveys going. It's tedious and not usually worth it unless you want to spend it on say, a browser game, but there's no real catch: you do surveys and you get a small amount of money.--92.251.241.196 (talk) 20:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I should get a script going that will take the survey for me! Then I can be lazy and rich. Googlemeister (talk) 20:46, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Naturally enough they have measures in place against that, although I don't know what they are.--178.167.172.73 (talk) 22:55, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The catch is the low rate of pay: if you divide the amount you're paid per survey by the time needed to take the survey, you'll get something well below minimum wage. --Carnildo (talk) 01:26, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]