Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2013 October 4

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.

October 4

Favor Bank

It seems hard to find an elaborately referenced and discussed topic about the "favor bank". Most students never heard about it and thinks of it as a financial institution instead of a philosophical idea. It will be helpful for them to learn about it existence, how it affects daily life and its potential for one to be successful if harnessed to one's advantage.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeybidan (talk • contribs) 01:35, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, first please don't indent with spaces(it creates a visual error that I corrected for you) and it helps to always sign your posts with ~~~~ so that we are better able to be clear on who is posting what and how to message you if need be. Your question is better suited for the helpdesk & if you chose to move it you may have a greater diversity of response. To answer your concerns which seem to be asking about why we have no article under that term, you may find Wikipedia:Your first article, Reliable Sources and Notability useful. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 01:49, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Or you could look at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Alansplodge (talk) 12:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Since nobody else has asked, maybe I'm the only clueless one but.... What is a favor bank? Dismas|^(talk) 13:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I have a rough idea but rusty, so I will await the reliable sources & article ;-). ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 14:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Having never heard of the concept before I'm not surprised it has no article here. However, there are articles on similar ideas such as LETS schemes Pay it Forward, volunteering, altruism, barter. --TammyMoet (talk) 13:47, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Is it something like a time bank? OsmanRF34 (talk) 21:57, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Glasgow and Edinburgh census 2011

Is there a website that shows the census 2011 for Scotland, especially its cities Glasgow and Edinburgh and their ridings in the House of Commons? I am trying to find out how many Muslims and Bangladeshis live in those cities and their ridings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.104.161 (talk) 02:54, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

It's not clear what you mean by their "ridings". Can you clarify please? Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:18, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

That would be riding (country subdivision), though I was not aware that there were any ridings in Scotland.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:32, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, the term is unknown in Britain, except for the historic divisions of the county of Yorkshire. I immediately assumed that the questionner was from Canada. --ColinFine (talk) 07:54, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, it seems they are. I wasn't aware the word was used there. My first discovery of the day. See Canadian English#Politics. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:59, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

The homepage for the census is here, and this page gives you details of what figures have so far been released. I think what you are saying is that you want ethnicity in UK parliamentary constituencies, and that would be in Table KS201SC, in Release 2A. Itsmejudith (talk) 06:45, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I tried Table KS201SC but it doesn't show the UK parliamentary constituencies in Glasgow and Edinburgh by ethnic group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.104.161 (talk) 15:03, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

'Muslim' is not, in itself, an ethnic group. Certainly not for the purposes of the UK census. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:33, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

To be fair, I don't think that's the OP's problem. Release 2A actually only contains the details for the Scotland, council area and health board areas (according to the older prospectus and page 6 of latest prospectus [1]). According to the both the older prospectus, and the later one, you will need to wait on November 14 (per page 6) for release 2B for all geographies and it will contain details for both religion and ethnicity. If I understand annex B (page 17) correctly, UK parliamentary constituencies is one of the geographies that will be provided although it will possibly only be available on the website initially with tables not being made available until disclosure control testing is complete. I would have thought that the online result stuff carries the same risks but perhaps the data is more limited. Either way I'm presuming it will be here once released [2]. I guess Itsmejudith must not have noticed the limited geographies but I would have thought that after so many questions, the OP could have learnt this themselves from the data provided once they found the problem. Nil Einne (talk) 16:23, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Quote on master/slave relations in pre-civil-war US

I do distinctly remember reading about a New England woman visiting the Southern states (certainly before the civil war, but possibly as far back as the founding father era), commenting on the number of mixed-race children, and observing that "every lady seems to know who the father of all the mulatto children on the surrounding plantations is, but is totally impervious to the going-on in her own household" (or words to that effect). I tried to locate the quote, but my Google-fu has failed me. Does the description ring anybody's bell? I'd be thankful for a reference or source! --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

It's from the diary of Mary Boykin Chesnut, subsequently published as A Diary from Dixie and Mary Chesnut's Civil War, in an entry from March 1861 (so only just barely before the Civil War): "Like the patriarchs of old, our men live all in one house with their wives and their concubines; and the mulattoes one sees in every family partly resemble the white children. Any lady is ready to tell you who is the father of all the mulatto children in everybody's household but her own. Those, she seems to think, drop from the clouds." Chesnut was a Southerner, not a New England woman. John M Baker (talk) 17:41, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:54, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

You might also be interested in Charles Dickens' 'American Notes', which devotes a relatively lengthy section to the cruelty and hypocrisy of slavery. The work itself is quite short and available online at Project Guttenburg.

Advent and Christmastide

When is the best time during Advent and Christmastide to listen to (and possibly sing to) Christmas carols in the churches? Does Christmas caroling occur before or after the Christmas season? I am just wondering, because "period immediately surrounding the holiday" on Christmas carol does not seem to be very helpful. I am not sure if that is supposed to mean the time period around the holiday season or within the holiday season. What special things do churches do during this time of year? And which holiday is more significant to practicing Christians - Advent+Christmastide or Lent+Eastertide? 164.107.146.249 (talk) 14:02, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

It depends on what denomination you are speaking of, so really there are many "right" answers to this especially the date it begins. In my experience there is no major denomination that sings or listens to carols in any type of group after the week of Christmas, though many cities/churches/malls do leave decorations up until after New Years. Also retailers have traditionally started with Christmas celebrations including caroling right after Thanksgiving in the U.S. (last Thursday in November).

As far as the 2nd part of your question, Eastern Orthodox Church denominations do put more significance on Easter traditionally. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 14:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

In the US now they are starting the X-mas sales before Thanksgiving, and the result is that everyone is quite sick of X-mas by the time it arrives, so carols would be annoying even the day after. StuRat (talk) 15:13, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

More and more it's even before Halloween. But the real blitz starts on the Friday after Thanksgiving. FDR was ridiculed for trying to move Thanksgiving up, but he was on the right track. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:22, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm an unrepentant heathen but have quite a bit of experience of Advent and Christmas church music in the Church of England at least, via choirs. Christmas music tends to start with a special service of lessons and carols (and/or Advent hymns) on the first Sunday of Advent. Successive Sundays see more Advent hymns and certain carols - the two sets are distinct, but the boundary is quite blurred - with carols mainly sung on or immediately around the Christmas holiday dates themselves. Certain carols are identified with certain days: Good King Wenceslas, for example, is a Boxing Day carol. One of the best opportunities to listen to carols, and to sing them in church, is at a service of Nine Lessons and Carols. Many churches hold such a service on on close before Christmas Eve, mirroring the famous one broadcast live from King's College, Cambridge chapel on the afternoon of every Christmas Eve, and it's a more spectacular affair musically than ordinary services. Some hymns or carols, or verses of them, in these services may be performed by the choir, but there is always plenty of congregational singing too. - Karenjc (talk) 16:45, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Cool. Now, I have some follow-up questions. Since you describe yourself as an "unrepentant heathen", would that be a good thing, a bad thing, or a neutral and meaningless thing? Did you used to sing in the choir as an "unrepentant heathen"? How come you didn't describe foot-washing? Does foot-washing only occur during Eastertide and not Christmastide? Do all the congregants have their feet washed, or do only the chosen congregants get their feet washed? What is the difference between Advent hymns and certain carols? Is the choir singing separated from the lay singing, or are they joined together into one? 164.107.103.176 (talk) 17:30, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

1It's fine by me. 2 Still do - not a church choir, just a choir that regularly performs in churches around Christmas. 3/4/5 No idea, sorry. 6 Christmas carol notes the (often blurry) distinction between carols and other songs associated with Christmas, including secular ones. Roughly speaking, Advent hymns address the idea "Jesus is on his way" rather than " This is about part of the Christmas story" or "Jesus is born", which characterise many carols. We Three Kings is unequivocally a carol, as is O Come, All Ye Faithful. O come, O come, Emmanuel and s:Lo, He Comes with Clouds Descending are good examples of Advent hymns. 7 The choir sits in the choir stalls. Hymns that are sung only by the choir are marked in the printed order of service, so the congregation knows when to participate. - Karenjc (talk) 19:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Foot washing is an Easter event and its practice very widely between churches. Rmhermen (talk) 17:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

For Christmas carols in church service itself, you will generally be talking about Protestant churches and mainly in the 4 Sundays before Christmas, Christmas eve, and Christmas day. For Catholic churches there is liturgical music for the Christmas season which extends somewhat until Epiphany (January 6) and even Candlemas on February 2. Eastern Orthodox Christmas isn't until January 7. Rmhermen (talk) 17:42, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

We are all using the Gregorian calendar, right? Even the Orthodox Christians? 164.107.103.176 (talk) 18:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't know about the Armenian, Greek, Coptic, Ukrainian etc Orthodox Churches. The Russian Orthodox Church, in which I was married and my sons are baptised, uses the Gregorian for general dating purposes such as telling their flock on what date Russian Easter is on each year, and dating marriages and baptisms etc - but they calculate the date of Easter using something that is definitely not the Gregorian calendar but also not quite the Julian calendar. As I understand it, it's the Julian but with an ecclesiastic tweak. Also, their formula for working out the date of Easter is a little different from the western one. The net result is that Russian and western Easters sometimes coincide, but more often than not don't. As for Christmas, it has always been 25 December in their calendar just like ours, and under the Gregorian with the current 13-day gap, that works out to be 7 January. But they also call it 7 January, not 25 December, because, as I say, they use the Gregorian calendar for communication with the rest of the world including their flock, which can be really confusing. So, when Russians tell you they celebrate Christmas on a different day than 25 December, that is both true and not true. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

If you are interested, during Advent some villages in the North Midlands sing their own carols, usually in pubs. This tradition goes back centuries as do some of the carols. --TammyMoet (talk) 20:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Odin/Santa on Sleipnir/Rudolph

• Christmas in the US is officially celebrated from the day after Thanksgiving until Jan 6th (the Twelve Days of Christmas) or Jan 16h in some jurisdictions, but not Arizona. The only carol Catholics are wont to sing in Church is Adeste Fideles, while most Protestants sing Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, as befits their station. μηδείς (talk) 20:27, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Which Protestant churches opt for "Rudolph" over religious carols? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
    • The cool ones? μηδείς (talk) 00:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
      • Maybe the ones trying to reach a secular audience. "Rudolph" is an old standard. Now, if a church were to sing Weird Al's "Christmas at Ground Zero" or Eddie C. Campbell's "Santa's Messin' With the Kid", that would be impressive. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Catholic churches usually sing three hymns per mass. I don't know what the rules are, we did sing Cat Steven's Morning Has Broken back in the 70's for a while. (I kind of wish we had Amazing Grace, but we never did.) We sang Silent Night, O Holy Night, and Adeste Fideles at Christmas time--they have obvious religious themes. Rudolph is entirely pagan (See Sleipnir, the eight-legged steed that carries Odin through the sky) and I assumed it was clear I was joshing the Protestants here. Instead I know they worship bibles, get drunk on Welches, and deny that crackers on Sunday are nutritious. In any case, here's a link to an exquisite carol that shows why atheism is ultimately barren in comparison to religious expression: Johnny Mathis, O Holy Night. μηδείς (talk) 04:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Really, Medeis,I find your sectarian behaviour here to be reprehensible. --TammyMoet (talk) 08:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

TammyMoet, I applaud your efforts to lessen the use of "sectarian" terms here but on this page alone you have bigger fish to fry with other responses in other posts. The downside of being anti-"sectarian" is that you prove how sectarian your own views are when you fail to speak on more obvious faux pas way above and below this topic. I applaud your effort just not its application. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 15:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

I obviously didn't notice them. I do try not to be sectarian myself, but having been brought up in an Anglican country and indoctrinated from an early age, it's difficult to overcome. Accordingly, if you could help me by pointing out what I've missed I can then revise my thinking. Thank you.--TammyMoet (talk) 15:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Since you have expressed interest, instances such as hoping"we all can dream" for "suicide" below and accusations above of "wilfully misunderstanding" because of citing the existence a Wikipedia page, accusations of being the "only one" (when just 2 are typing the views, so lonely I guess) and of "incompetence" or being a "joke" for referencing a wikipedia page that apparently crosses a dogma. Labeling certain views by repeatedly using a crude sexual act or as a "cancer" seems to be a regular favorite as well on here lately. Every editor can stand on their own so this is simply answering your follow up query, but as I said before the sectarianism is not lacking just the communities comments encouraging free expression of viewpoints may. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 17:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't profess to understand that. Guess I'm just not intelligent enough. Oh well, back to the day job. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:18, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

I hope you do understand, Tammy, the silly portion of my comments (basically everything outside mentioning the three traditional carols and the origin of Santa in Odin) was meant in jest. μηδείς (talk) 18:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

this might shed light on the thinking of Tammy's contribution here: STFU means what? I have subsequently revised my mistaken WP:AGF, or should I say it was removed for me. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 19:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Henny Youngman used to say, "I was an atheist for a while, but I gave it up. No holidays!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

• Can anyone figure out why the wikimarkup for the caption under the picture of Odin isn't working? Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 16:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

No thumb. - Karenjc (talk) 17:15, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I didn't think that was necessary when a pixel size was specified. I certainly never would have figured that out. μηδείς (talk) 18:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

East african nations Ismaili nizari population

Which East African nations had the largest population of Ismaili nizaris, regardless they were of Indian and Pakistani origins before they left those nations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.104.161 (talk) 15:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Succession of the U.S. Speaker of the House

Given the current impasse on the United States debt ceiling, I have to wonder: is there any contingency plan for what happens if the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives becomes unable to fulfill his duties [removed text. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 16:46, 6 October 2013 (UTC)]? Would there be any way to pass a measure to avoid the crisis without the chamber first sitting down and spending days, even weeks in default while having a big power struggle between the leading Republicans? Is there a way to nominate a "Speaker pro tempore" for an interim period, or to do things without one? Wnt (talk) 20:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

[removed 5 comments re:text] ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 16:48, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

unreferenced side dscussion
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Suicide is a little extreme. Resignation is not beyond the realm of possibility. He's actually trying to manage at least two severely different factions in his own party right now. That's why he can't hold an up-or-down vote on anything - because the Dems and the reasonable GOPs would defeat the teabaggers. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC) What is your fucking problem Bugs? Can you not refrain from your obscenity? It's really deranged, your obsession with homosexual fetishes. μηδείς (talk) 21:49, 4 October 2013 (UTC) The tea party itself invented that term. And why do you continue supporting an entity that inherently hates you? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:13, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Is it really plurality vote? The article describes several impasses from a century ago that were resolved by plurality vote, but only by some kind of agreement after they failed to get majority. Has that been changed? Wnt (talk) 22:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I was wrong, the House site says absolute majority here. In any case, that simply means a rump plus the other party will elect the speaker. μηδείς (talk) 00:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

As I understand it, voting with another party to organize the house is generally considered tantamount to changing parties. It's the one non-negotiable party-line issue in our legislative tradition. --Trovatore (talk) 00:09, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, the point is, they gotta pick somebody to have a vote, let alone get a majority. Is there any off-the-shelf plan that just in case, so-and-so is the next shoo-in, or will it take a lot of time to decide who the front running candidates are? Wnt (talk) 08:15, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

According to the House website: "Longest election for Speaker: After more than two months and 133 ballots, Nathaniel P. Banks of Massachusetts was elected Speaker on February 2, 1856." Note this was directly before the Civil War. Note also that having to raise the debt ceiling on an emergency basis is caused by months, if not years of irresponsible action by the legislature and failure to pass a balanced budget, or any budget at all. It's kind of like worrying what will happen to a self-induced diabetic who is too sick to get to the hospital for a kidney transplant. μηδείς (talk) 18:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

non-allowed "chatroom", "heated debate", "skew"ed responses etc. per:Ref Guidelines
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
We were actually running a surplus at the end of the Clinton years. The Republican monolith during the 2000s put deficit spending through the roof, only they didn't get concerned about it until a black Democrat got elected president. As someone was saying on the radio just a little bit ago, even during some of the shutdowns during the Reagan years, Reagan and House Speaker Tip O'Neill met on a daily basis, as they put the nation's interests ahead of petty politics. Those days are long gone. The tea party, a small minority, is running the House, and no progress can be made because the Speaker (who is incompetent and should resign) is afraid to have "the people", i.e. the full House, vote on anything unless he thinks the reasonable Republicans + the teabaggers will win. And the dirty little secret is that, despite what Romney and his kind kept saying last year, government spending does fuel the economy and does create jobs. The economy is slowly improving, despite tea party attempts to cause as much damage as they can. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC) Once again, what is your problem, Bugs? Why do you think it appropriate or helpful to use a term of derision associated with gay sex to describe your political opponents? Is using anti-gay slurs your idea of being a liberal? Don't give me any bee ess about what the tea party would "do" to me. You haven't got a single source ascribing an anti-gay platform to any tea party group. Neither do you have any source that shows any tea party group calls itself the term you insist on using. This is incredibly juvenile and offensive. μηδείς (talk) 23:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC) It's not about gay sex, it's orientation-neutral. Nor is it an anti-gay slur. And the term did originate with the tea party, and the media jumped on it, as they often do about anything unusual. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:41, 6 October 2013 (UTC) At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized, at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do - it's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds. You wound with your ad hominems Bugs, we have said it a dozen times but maybe this time you will listen. Market St.⧏ ⧐ Diamond Way 01:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC) I am in general restating what editorialists have said. They are more likely to "wound" the House Speaker than is anybody who's writing here. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:46, 6 October 2013 (UTC) Community tolerating homophobic language now? Or we just tolerate: "is there any contingency plan for what happens if the [insert those "stolen from the taxpayers"] becomes unable to fulfill his duties, whether by a medical accident, a terrorist attack, or (we all can dream) suicide?" OP and Bugs where do we get the application to use ad hominems with impunity? Market St.⧏ ⧐ Diamond Way 00:57, 6 October 2013 (UTC) The term "teabagging" has no connection to homophobia. And it's nowhere near as offensive BLP-wise as is the term "santorum". I'll let you do the research on those things while I go get some Pepto-Bismol. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:41, 6 October 2013 (UTC) Again, not answering my question just more ad hominems, actually "research"ing something you haven't:WP:VULGAR. Will avoid divergent spread rebuttal queries. Market St.⧏ ⧐ Diamond Way 01:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC) Speaking of ad hominem, the term "santorum" is a hundred times more offensive than "teabagger". Until you've expunged that gross BLP violation from Wikipedia, keep your complaints about my terminology to yourself. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:08, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

See "Speaker pro tem of the House of Representatives" on Google - this is the person who acts as the Speaker when that person is not present. Collect (talk) 15:18, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

That would be Senator Ted Cruz.[3] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

These are useful links, but I'm still confused. According to Ballotpedia, [4] "Speakers pro tem" are appointed by the House Speaker, and according to another page one person can "frequently" serve as Speaker pro tempore. I get the feeling then that this is a very temporary thing done by the Speaker while he is away - which leaves me wondering if there is anyone "on tap" to take up the role should he become abruptly incapacitated, or any way to appoint one in that circumstance. Wnt (talk) 18:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

The "frequently" serving part may simply be a rotation perk of when a Speaker wants to use a carrot or stick with certain powerful committee chairmen or members, all those serving would probably be in the top 5 or 10 of the controlling party. When Speaker Rayburn passed in 1961 it basically all boiled down to a cliquish, power-leveraging popularity contest that even President Kennedy had some influence over (his party controlled the House at the time), see more here.

Given that the Speakers position is not "termed" per se but he/she can be voted out of power at any time by a coalition, clear concise & understandable succession may be intentionally left ambiguous. It would give pause to any would be usurper in the Speaker's party knowing that if you step out of line and revolt you may not in fact be elected the new Speaker. A clear line of succession within House leadership could be seen as inviting no-confidence votes if everyone knew exactly where they would stand after the dust fell. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 19:36, 7 October 2013 (UTC)