Humanities desk
< July 25	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 27 >

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.

July 26[edit]

Another American political what-if: former two-term presidents as vice-presidential candidates[edit]

Would a person who has served two terms as President be allowed to run for Vice President under the United States Constitution? If so, and that ticket got elected, what would be done if the President became unable to serve, and consequently, the former President stepped up for what was effectively a third term? 69.224.113.202 (talk) 15:36, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See our article: Vice President of the United States#Eligibility. Rmhermen (talk) 15:55, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese takeaway duck[edit]

When you order duck in a Chinese restaurant, what species of duck are you getting? One Googled source suggests Mandarin Duck but their edibility or otherwise is not mentioned in the article.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any species of duck is okay as long as they aren't serving Rattus rattus. But to seriously reply to your question, Duck mentions "All domestic ducks are descended from the wild Mallard Anas platyrhynchos, except the Muscovy Duck [7]." It is likely that most duck served in any restaurant are domestic ducks raised for slaughter.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.32.118.182 (talk) 17:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK it's likely to be either Aylesbury Duck or Gressingham Duck. These are both species specially bred for their meat.--TammyMoet (talk) 09:35, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question related to Satyr[edit]

What is the "'shaggy demon of the mountain-pass' (أزب الاكب) of old Arab legend" referred to in that article? I don't know how to properly transliterate the Arabic, it's something like Azb Al-Akb (missing vowels). Шизомби (talk) 18:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like that that passage was taken from the 1911 Britannica, and a later editor replaced the transliterations in the original with Hebrew and Arabic letters. The original from the Britannica is as follows:

In the Authorized Version of Isa. xiii. 21, xxxiv. 14 the word "satyr" is used to render the Hebrew sĕ‛īrīm, "hairy ones." A kind of demon or supernatural being known to Hebrew folk-lore as inhabiting waste places is meant; a practice of sacrificing to the sĕ‛īrīm is alluded to in Lev. xvii. 7, where E. V. has "devils." They correspond to the "shaggy demon of the mountain-pass" (azabb al-‛akaba) of old Arab superstition.

I don't know about the Hebrew, but from Googling I think what is meant for the Arabic is ازب العقبة azabb al-‛aqabah. I will make some fixes to the article there. --Cam (talk) 23:35, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm still curious where then the EB got the "shaggy demon" from, should someone be able to determine that. Шизомби (talk) 23:53, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well it seems that is exactly what it translates as, azabb meaning hairy and al-‛aqabah means mountain pass. Also hairy seems to have meant a devil, or the devil, or any kind of demon. It only corresponds to though: hairy mountain creatures, they're a little like greek satyrs, which christians depicted as devils, it's comparative mythology! meltBanana 01:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Groovy! Although I was wondering more where stories about it can be found, but it's nice to know what it literally means. Шизомби (talk) 02:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ancestry, nationality, ethnicity, etc[edit]

This is partially about WP but not really about editing, so that's why I'm posting here instead of the help desk...

What is it with the nationalities of people from the UK who have articles here? It seems that every UK bio article has to go through some sort of thing like this:

He's English.
- No! He's Scottish but from England.
  - No!! He's English!!
    - You're both wrong, he's British!!!

The article for Ray Park has been going through a bit of this in the past and I really don't get it. Dismas|^(talk) 21:40, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

People from nations that are frequently invaded or conquered seem to be a lot more crazily nationalistic. The English/Scottish/Irish edit wars are pretty tame, I think. Try figuring out if someone was, say, Serbian or Croatian, especially if they from a time period where that whole area was owned by Hungary. And what about Albanians, Macedonians, and Greeks? Those arguments can extend into prehistory, it's pretty ridiculous. I guess people with national inferiority complexes find Wikipedia a handy outlet to voice their pride. Adam Bishop (talk) 22:27, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflict: :Because the unity of the United Kingdom is a politically contentious issue. Plaid Cymru is a Welsh independence party, and the Scottish Nationalist Party dominate the coalition government there. Other parties (especially the Conservatives) are pro-British unity, and will probably oppose a referendum in Scotland on the issue. Gordon Brown found his background to be a minor issue prior to his appointment as UK Prime Minister. He has a constituency in Scotland, and degrees from Glasgow and Edinburgh. Traditionally, UK Prime Ministers have constituencies in England, and an Oxford/Cambridge education - the elite universities there. Scotland was an independent country, in personal union (shared the same monarch) with England before the Act of Union, 1708. I think. The situation can be complicated even more by the situation in Northern Ireland, where many Nationalist citizens will reject the legitimacy of the state, and the understandable confusion foreigners seem to share of the constitutional structure. One US radio presenter referred to Jacqui Smith as the "Home Secretary of England," as opposed to the UK. There is, in fact, no such devolved government of England, as there is in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. (See the West Lothian Question.) Unlike the USA, the structure of government seems to be rather more asymmetric. In the US, no major political force represents a state as its main interest.78.146.34.231 (talk) 22:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is clear is this: there would be quite a bit more encyclopedia here if we all just got on with the job, rather than arguing over it.78.146.34.231 (talk) 22:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Tempshill (talk) 22:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with the motives described above, certainly in the case of Ray Park. If someone goes to a different country where there is citisenship it is easy to give their nationality; someone born in England working in the USA on a visa is certainly British and have a passport to prove it. If they take up US citisenship then they become an English-born American. The problem is that England, Scotland, Wales and Norther Ireland do not have individual citizenships or passports. It is not always clear if someone is an "English living in Scotland" or an English-born Scot. You would often go with the way they identify themselves, whether the move is intended to be permanent, or if they moved at a young age. None of these are clear-cut and subject to dispute. -- Q Chris (talk) 07:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen Wikipedia:LAME#Ethnic_and_national_feuds? It's by no means limited to the UK. Plus, I dare you to describe George W Bush as a Connecticuter in his article. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 10:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although that's pretty much how Kent Hance portrayed (and defeated) Bush in his bid for the House of Representatives in 1973. I've heard, in fact, that he went so far as to call him a carpet bagger. TastyCakes (talk) 17:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Particular style of cross[edit]

Hello! I've seen this particular type of cross (exemplified by the crest of Perth College, Western Australia) in a number of different coats of arms and things, and was wondering if it had a particular name or association with any specific theological concept/order. It seems to be favoured by Anglican institutions? Thanks. AustralianMelodrama (talk) 23:30, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ignoring the decoration in the centre & concentrating on the flared ends, it is a Cross moline. The cross article provides names for a whole range of fancy crosses, in its As emblems and symbols section. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the heraldic cross variations (as opposed to cross variations associated with different religious groups) do not really have any very specific "meaning" as such. However, they do all have names (sometimes multiple alternative names). AnonMoos (talk) 07:33, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a crest, dammit. —Tamfang (talk) 02:58, 2 August 2009 (UTC) [reply]