Humanities desk
< November 13	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 15 >

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.

November 14[edit]

Another trump question[edit]

Why does Putin like trump?Uncle dan is home (talk) 02:07, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Consider the Dana Milbank opinion piece Sarah Palin, the political mother of Trump.^WaPo -- ToE 03:19, 14 November 2016 (UTC)~~[reply]

Oops. Apparently I can't read.-- ToE 12:54, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus of foreign leaders is that Trump will undermine US policy by weakening NATO, as he threatened to do, and not confront Russia over it's attack on the Ukraine, including annexation of Crimea, or their attacks on non-ISIS opposition forces in Syria. This will leave Russia in a much better position, and able to invade and annex additional nations. StuRat (talk) 04:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See Useful idiot. older ≠ wiser 13:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

M109 in Canada[edit]

M109_howitzer#M109A4_3 says that the M109 was phased out in Canada by 2005. But the article also has a picture of a M109 taken in a Canadian Forces base in 2011: File:M109A4 155 mm SP Gun, CCFB Valcartier, Quebec, 5 Sep 2011 (26).JPG. What was the eventual fate of the Canadian Forces' M109s? Apparently at least one was turned into a display piece. Pizza Margherita (talk) 06:41, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This Canadian Army forum thread about the possibility of sending old Canadian M109s to Afghanistan has: "I was under the impression our M109s were sold off (this was from an arty WO). Maybe rumour mill, but I trust my source that at least some are gone". Another contributor replies: "M109's were mothballed...I sent the ones from Shilo to Meaford for storage...unless they used them for targets". Alansplodge (talk) 16:35, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seventh United States Army Structure During World War Two[edit]

I am wondering about the structure of the Seventh US Army in WWII. Their article does not outline this, and the United States Army Europe article only displays today's structure. I have done only a little digging elsewhere, but most of the sites I've seen only display modern or cold war information. Thank you in advance for your help; you guys here at the reference desk don't get enough thanks in my opinion. Fritzmann2002 16:19, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe This book would help? I also found this. Haven't looked deep into either, but perhaps one of those may have what you're looking for? --Jayron 32 09:26, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If all else fails, I expect the person mentioned here could and would help [1] (listed here [2]). NB maybe this isn't confusing to you but I don't think the "commecial" means it has to be a business inquiry to contact that number, simply that it's part of the public international phone network rather than the Defense Switched Network. BTW, if anyone is interested our article on the situation in WW2 seems to be unsourced & also contradict the above source. (More details in article talk page.) Interestingly it seems to be nearly the exact wording other than the differences in details, which makes me think it was copied and pasted from that or some other similar source. While this probably isn't a copyvio problem, it should be acknowledged per policy to avoid confusion etc. Nil Einne (talk) 13:44, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are outlines at Operation Husky order of battle#U.S. 7th Army and Operation Dragoon order of battle#Seventh Army. Thereafter, the composition of the army seems to have been rather fluid: " In less than nine months of continuous fighting, the Seventh had advanced over 1,000 miles and for varying times had commanded 24 American and Allied Divisions, including the 36th, 42nd, 44th, 45th, 63rd,70th, 103rd, and 105th" according to our United States Army Europe article. Alansplodge (talk) 16:14, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Trumps roots in american history[edit]

Is Donald Trump historically inline with a politician like Jacob Leisler ? --89.12.243.241 (talk) 21:19, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "inline with"? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:20, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps that he deserves to be executed for treason against the crown? Wymspen (talk) 22:01, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the current American monarch? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:04, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Milo Yiannopoulos has a good claim to our queen-in-waiting. There's also some nonsense in the Russian Times about a BC blogger's plan for the Left Coast and Nevada to join Canada. Do we have a Trump derangement syndrome article yet? μηδείς (talk) 01:40, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

women in congressional and state races[edit]

I heard a couple of people on TV say that women in congressional and state races lost ground in the election this year. The idea was that Trump's misogamy was a contributor to that. Do you know where anyone says that in writing? Thanks. --Halcatalyst (talk) 22:54, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trump's opposition to marriage? Curiouser and curiouser. μηδείς (talk) 01:42, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to This article the premise is wrong. There will be the same number of women in the U.S. Congress, though not the same distribution as the prior congress. The outgoing congress has 84 Representatives and 20 Senators who are women, the incoming Congress will have 83 Representatives and 21 Senators who are women. --Jayron 32 09:16, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]