Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
 
Line 1: Line 1:
<noinclude>{{Wikipedia:Reference desk/header|WP:RD/H}}
<noinclude>{{Wikipedia:Reference desk/header|WP:RD/H}}
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]
[[Category:Pages automatically checked for incorrect links]]
[[Category:Pages automatically checked for accidental language links]]
[[Category:Wikipedia resources for researchers]]
[[Category:Wikipedia resources for researchers]]
[[Category:Wikipedia help forums]]
[[Category:Wikipedia help forums]]
[[Category:Wikipedia reference desk|Humanities]]
</noinclude>
[[Category:Wikipedia help pages with dated sections]]
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]</noinclude>


= December 24 =
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2011 December 20}}


== Testicles in art ==
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2011 December 21}}
:[[File:Neptuno_colosal_(Museo_del_Prado)_01.jpg|right|100px]]
What are some famous or iconic depictions of testicles in visual art (painting, sculpture, etc)? Pre 20th century is more interesting to me but I will accept more modern works as well. [[Special:Contributions/174.74.211.109|174.74.211.109]] ([[User talk:174.74.211.109|talk]]) 00:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:Unfortunately not pre-20th century, but the first thing that comes to mind is New York's ''[[Charging Bull]]'' (1989) sculpture, which has a famously well-rubbed scrotum. [[User:GalacticShoe|GalacticShoe]] ([[User talk:GalacticShoe|talk]]) 02:41, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:What's "iconic"? There's nothing special about testicles in visual arts. All male nudes originally had testicles and penises, unless they fell off (penises tended to do that more, leaving just the testicles) or were removed. There was a pope who couldn't stand them so there's a big room in a basement in the Vatican full of testicles and penises. Fig leaves were late fashion statements, possibly a brainstorm of the aforementioned pope. Here's one example from antiquity among possibly hundreds, from the [[Moschophoros]] (genitals gone but they obviously were there once), through the [[Kritios Boy]], through this famous Poseidon that used apparently to throw a trident [https://www.meisterdrucke.ie/fine-art-prints/Greek/239739/Statue-of-Poseidon,-c.460-450-BC.html] (über-famous but I couldn't find it on Wikipedia, maybe someone else can; how do they know it's not Zeus throwing a lightning bolt? is there an inscription?), and so many more! [[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 05:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
::The article you're looking for is [[Artemision Bronze]]. [[User:GalacticShoe|GalacticShoe]] ([[User talk:GalacticShoe|talk]]) 07:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:And maybe the [[Cerne Abbas Giant]]. [[User:Shantavira|Shantavira]]|[[User talk:Shantavira|<sup>feed me</sup>]] 10:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:[[Bake-danuki]], somewhat well-known in the West through [[Pom Poko]]. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 11:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:Racoons are often depecited in Japanese art as having big balls. As in 1/4 the size of the rest of their body. [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 23:44, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
::These are [[Raccoon dog|raccoon <u>dogs</u>]], an entirely different species, not even from the same taxonomic family as [[raccoon]]s. The testicularly spectacularly endowed ones are ''bake-danuki'', referred to in the reply above yours. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 02:28, 26 December 2024 (UTC)


== European dynasties that inherit their name from a female: is there a genealogical technical term to describe that situation? ==
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2011 December 22}}


The Habsburg were descended (in the male line) from a female (empress [[Maria Theresa]]). They were the Habsburg rulers of Austria because of her, not because of their Lorraine male ancestor. So their name goes against general European patrilinear naming customs. Sometimes, starting with [[Joseph II]] they are called Habsburg-Lorraine, but that goes against the rule that the name of the father comes first (I've never heard that anyone was called Lorraine-Habsburg) and most people don't even bother with the Lorraine part, if they even know about it.
= December 23 =


As far as I can tell this mostly occurs in states where the sovereign happens at some point to be a female. The descendants of that female sovereign (if they rule) sometimes carry her family name (how often? that must depend on how prominent the father is), though not always (cf. queen Victoria's descendants). Another example would be king James, son of Mary queen of Scots and a nobody. But sometimes this happens in families that do not rule over anything (cf. the Chigi-Zondadari in Italy who were descended from a male Zondadari who married a woman from the much more important family of the Chigi and presumably wanted to be associated with them).
== Religious divisions: leadership vs dogma ==


What do genealogists, especially those dealing with royal genealogies, call this sort of situation? I'm looking for something that would mean in effect "switch to the mother's name", but the accepted technical equivalent if it exists.
The major divisions in Islam started as a dispute over who would be Muhammad's successor. The major divisions of Mormonism started with the dispute over the succession to Joseph Smith. At least two of the divisions within mainstream Christianity started with disputes over the authority of the Bishop of Rome as supreme leader of the church. Compared to this, how common is it for a religion to split based on questions of dogma rather than leadership? --[[User:Carnildo|Carnildo]] ([[User talk:Carnildo|talk]]) 01:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:Happens all the time as well. See [[Protestantism]] for such a split regarding Chritianity. --[[User:Jayron32|<font style="color:#000099">Jayron</font>]]'''''[[User talk:Jayron32|<font style="color:#009900">32</font>]]''''' 01:18, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


Also do you know of other such situations in European history?
::The [[Protestant Reformation]] was due to issues like [[Reformation#Corruption|corruption]] and the desire to escape Rome's secular control, as well as doctrine. --[[User:Colapeninsula|Colapeninsula]] ([[User talk:Colapeninsula|talk]]) 14:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


In England where William (Orange) and Mary (Stuart) were joint sovereign did anyone attempt to guess what a line descended from them both would be called (before it became clear such a line would not happen)?
:It's rather a strong contrast between Islam and Christianity that until relatively recent times almost all major Christian divisions involved a doctrinal element (so that the Catholic-Orthodox split was ostensibly about the [[filioque]] clause, etc.), while most major Muslim divisions were much more about who had the right to lead the Muslim community (as ruler, not just religious leader) than abstract questions of doctrine as such. I don't know that one is worse or better than another -- depending on whether you think it's sillier to dispute "about a vowel" (as the homoousianist vs. homoioousianist controversy is sometimes claimed to have been), or to hold active current grudges about 7th-century political conflicts (as is involved in the Sunni-Shi`ah split), etc. etc. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 01:29, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


[[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 03:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
::[[Muhammad]] ruled most of Arabia on his death, so the issue of who succeeded him was of more importance than who succeeded e.g. Martin Luther. When Christian religious authorities held temporal power or were close to kings, there were Christian schisms based largely on power, e.g. the [[Western Schism]] in the 14th and 15th centuries, and the [[English Reformation]] which was partly a reaction against [[Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor]]'s designs for influence in England (he was the nephew of Henry's first wife [[Catherine of Aragon]]). Although this is getting away from the original question. --[[User:Colapeninsula|Colapeninsula]] ([[User talk:Colapeninsula|talk]]) 14:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


:It happens a fair amount in European history, but I'm not sure it means what you think it means. It's generally a dynastic or patrilineal affiliation connected with the woman which is substituted, not the name of the woman herself. The descendents of Empress Matilda are known as Plantagenets after her husband's personal nickname. I'm not sure that the Habsburg-Lorraine subdivision is greatly different from the [[Capetian dynasty]] (always strictly patrilineal) being divided into the House of Artois, House of Bourbon, House of Anjou, etc. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 09:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:I don't know if you're asking about smaller religions as well, but all [[Bahá'í divisions]] have started over leadership. As for Christianity, doctrinal tensions have always abounded, but at least in the early Church, they seem to have usually been resolved easily enough. Acts Ch 15 records a debate over circumcision, and in Galatians 2, Paul even accuses Peter of hypocrisy for refusing to associate publicly with Gentiles, but I've never heard of the argument going much further. See [[Judaizers#In_the_Early_Church | Judaizers]] for more. More relevant might be the [[Donatism | Donatist]] controversy, which produced a genuine split with Rome over a matter at least partially concerning doctrine. Here, though, one sees that doctrine and personalities are impossible to fully separate anyway, since the dispute was about the validity of sacraments administered by (allegedly) sinful priests. It's one thing to say they disagreed about the sacraments, and another to say they argued about who could confer them. [[User:It&#39;s Been Emotional|IBE]] ([[User talk:It&#39;s Been Emotional|talk]]) 08:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
::By the name of the mother I didn't mean her personal name (obviously!) but her line. The example I used of Maria Theresa should have been enough to clarify that. The cases of the Plantagenets (like that of the descendants of Victoria who became known as Saxe-Cobourg, not Hanover) are absolutely regular and do fall precisely outside the scope of my question. The Habsburg-Lorraine are not a new dynasty. The addition of "Lorraine" has no importance, it is purely decorative. It is very different from the switch to collateral branches that happened in France with the Valois, the Bourbon, which happened because of the Salic law, not because of the fact that a woman became the sovereign. Obviously such situations could never occur in places where the Salic law applied. It's happened regularly recently (all the queens of the Netherlands never prevented the dynasty continuing as Oranje or in the case of England as Windsor, with no account whatsoever taken of the father), but I'm not sure how much it happened in the past, where it would have been considered humiliating for the father and his line. In fact I wonder when the concept of that kind of a "prince consort" who is used to breed children but does not get to pass his name to them was first introduced. Note neither Albert nor Geoffrey were humiliated in this way and I suspect the addition of "Lorraine" was just to humor Francis (who also did get to be Holy Roman Emperor) without switching entirely to a "Lorraine" line and forgetting altogether about the "Habsburg" which in fact was the regular custom, and which may seem preposterous to us now given the imbalance of power, but was never considered so in the case of Albert even though he was from an entirely inconsequential family from an entirely inconsequential German statelet. I know William of Orange said he would refuse such a position and demanded that he and Mary be joint sovereign hence "William and Mary". [[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 10:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
::Well, there is [[Arianism]], which kept the Church occupied for a while. This and similar differences of [[Christology]] really kept the church(es) occupied for quite a long while. --[[User:Stephan Schulz|Stephan Schulz]] ([[User talk:Stephan Schulz|talk]]) 12:45, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:::As a sidenote, the waters of this question are somewhat muddied by the fact that [[Surnames]] as we know them were not (even confining ourselves to Europe) always a thing; they arose at different times in different places and in different classes. Amongst the ruling classes, people were often 'surnamed' after their territorial possessions (which could have been acquired through marriage or other means) rather than their parental name(s). Also, in some individual family instances (in the UK, at any rate), a man was only allowed to inherit the property and/or title of/via a female heiress whom they married on the condition that they adopted her family name rather than her, his, so that the propertied/titled family name would be continued. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 13:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:::The [[Syriac Orthodox Church]], [[Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria]], [[Armenian Apostolic Church]] and other eastern churches split from Rome over similar issues about the dual nature of Jesus following the [[Council of Chalcedon]].
::::{{small|Or 'surnamed' after their ''lack'' of territorial possessions, like poor [[John Lackland]]. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 02:09, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}}
:::The various modern [[Jewish_religious_movements#Modern_divisions_or_denominations|divisions of Judaism]] are largely based on doctrine. And the number and variety of different [[Schools of Buddhism]] make Christianity look doctrinally unified - the history is rather vague and Wikipedia's articles aren't very good but doctrine played a part in many schisms. --[[User:Colapeninsula|Colapeninsula]] ([[User talk:Colapeninsula|talk]]) 14:30, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
::::There's a slight issue with the original question — church government is a doctrinal matter in many Christian denominations. Catholic theology of church government depends on the existence of a Pope with supremacy over all other clergymen, while Orthodox theology of church government teaches that it's not appropriate to have a single clergyman atop everyone else. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 04:04, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:There's a theory I remember reading a long time ago (can't for the life of me remember where), that suggested that any original teaching will only hold together as long as the original teacher lives (because the original teacher is the only one who understands it fully). after his/her death, his inner core of followers will divide along differing interpretations of that original teaching (based on the limited understanding of those inner-core members), and those divisions will gather differing crowds (because the third tier of followers understands the teaching even less, and is more susceptible to the authority of the second tier), and after that these divisions will solidify into clearly defined sects with divergent dogma. It's an interesting theory - every religion I know about shows some signs of it - but until I can remember the source you'll have to take it with a grain of salt. --[[User_talk:Ludwigs2|<span style="color:darkblue;font-weight:bold">Ludwigs</span><span style="color:green;font-weight:bold">2</span>]] 04:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
::Do you reckon it's happening in [[Scientology]] yet? [[User:HiLo48|HiLo48]] ([[User talk:HiLo48|talk]]) 05:16, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:::Already happened: see [[Free Zone (Scientology)]]. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 05:32, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
::::Amazing. I wouldn't have expected it. That supports Ludwig's theory very well. [[User:HiLo48|HiLo48]] ([[User talk:HiLo48|talk]]) 06:18, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:::::I'm not sure that is supports Ludwig's theory in particular, rather than more general sociological and anthropological observations of the issue: successful religions are often (almost always?) founded by a charismatic individual (often an 'outsider') who rebels against existing dogma, and/or the political/religious establishment. Charisma only lasts while the founder lives, obviously, and if the new religion has been successful, it will have become 'the establishment' - so the cycle can begin again. If I remember correctly, an Islamic scholar (I can't remember his name) wrote on this very subject some centuries back. If you're interested in the subject, there is masses of material available, but I'd recommend getting hold of [[Peter Worsley]]'s ''The Trumpet Shall Sound: A study of "cargo cults" in Melanesia''. Dated, and flawed in some ways, but a fascinating analysis of the dynamics of 'religion-building' in an unfamiliar context - and the unfamiliarity actually helps in gaining insight into the underlying processes, at least in my opinion. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 06:45, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


:In the old style of dynastic reckoning, Elizabeth II would have been transitional from Saxe-Coburg to Glucksberg, and even under the current UK rules, descendants of Prince Philip (and only those descendants) who need surnames use [[Mountbatten-Windsor]]. -- [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 14:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
== Who will become president of the United States if.... ==
:In hyphenated dynasty names, the elements are typically not father and mother but stem and branch: ''Saxe-Weimar'' was the branch of the Saxon dukes whose apanage included the city of Weimar, ''Bourbon-Parma'' the branch of Bourbon (or Bourbon-Anjou) that included dukes of Parma. [[User:Tamfang|—Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 03:48, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:Your example of [[James VI and I]] is not in fact an example of this: although his mother, [[Mary, Queen of Scots]], was of the of [[House of Stuart]], so was his father, [[Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley|Henry Stuart, Duke of Albany]] (better known by his earlier title as Lord Darnley). James was therefore a Stuart on both sides. [[User:Proteus|Proteus]] [[User_talk:Proteus|(Talk)]] 13:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


= December 25 =
Let's say, that for some reason, the President, Vice President, and [[United States presidential line of succession|all the people who may succeed the president]] were aboard a plane, and it crashed, killing all on-board. Who will become president now? Also, what if they were all at the Capitol, and there was a nuclear explosion, again killing everyone? Who will become president? [[User:Narutolovehinata5|Narutolovehinata5]] <sup>[[User talk:Narutolovehinata5|t]][[Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5|c]][[WP:CSD|csd]][[Special:Newpages|new]]</sup> 06:06, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:The nuclear explosion killed everyone, eliminating any need for leadership at all. →<span style="font-family:Euclid Fraktur">[[User:Σ|<font color="#BA0000">Σ</font>]][[User talk:Σ|<font color="forestgreen">τ</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Σ|<font color="forestgreen">c</font>]].</span> 06:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:But what if they died in a plane crash? [[User:Narutolovehinata5|Narutolovehinata5]] <sup>[[User talk:Narutolovehinata5|t]][[Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5|c]][[WP:CSD|csd]][[Special:Newpages|new]]</sup> 06:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:And by everyone, I meant everyone in the Capitol and its vicinity, not everyone in America.... [[User:Narutolovehinata5|Narutolovehinata5]] <sup>[[User talk:Narutolovehinata5|t]][[Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5|c]][[WP:CSD|csd]][[Special:Newpages|new]]</sup> 06:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:: Nobody knows the answer to such a question. The succession is defined only to a certain extent, and even that is designed to account for some extreme, not to mention extremely unlikely, scenarios. Beyond that ... chaos would reign. Somehow it would all get sorted out. Eventually. Exactly how, is anybody's guess. If would depend on a host of unknowable and imponderable factors, about which only novelists and film makers get to dream up solutions. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<font face="Papyrus"><sup>[your turn]</sup></font>]] 07:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:::The succession article acknowledges the lack of clarity on that nightmare scenario. I'm sure that hasn't stop constitutional scholars from speculating about it. The OP should google the subject and see what he can find. There's something to consider, though: The American governmental structure has a number of layers. Assuming it was not an act of war, but just a tragic accident that all 600 or so top officials were somehow on that oversized plane, or cruise ship, or whatever, the individual states and the communications systems would still be intact. All 50 states could immediately have individual sessions to appoint replacement Reps and Senators as per the laws in their states. Now you've got a Congress, and the law of succession kicks in, the Supreme Court is re-filled, etc. Within a day, or maybe even in a few hours, you've got a theoretically functioning government again. Obviously, lots of work remains to be done. But chaos need not reign. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 07:19, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
::::<small>Actually chaos would reign o'er all seeing as I would become president.--[[User:Jeanne boleyn|Jeanne Boleyn]] ([[User talk:Jeanne boleyn|talk]]) 07:22, 23 December 2011 (UTC)</small>
:::::Because of the uncertain result of our last federal election, Australia didn't have a working government for around month. Things proceeded very smoothly. Dunno if the same would apply with the USA. [[User:HiLo48|HiLo48]] ([[User talk:HiLo48|talk]]) 07:49, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:::::: ''didn't have a working government for around month'' - that's not really true. See [[Caretaker government of Australia]]. Prior to ''every'' election, the government assumes caretaker mode until such time as a result is known. Sometimes it takes a little longer for a result than usual. During these times, much of the ordinary business of government does go into abeyance, but important appointments that cannot wait, and any other major decisions that cannot wait, are made, usually with the Opposition being informed. I mean, if we'd been attacked by terrorist bombs or swamped by a tsunami just after the election, they wouldn't have just thrown their hands into the air and said, ''"Sorry, nobody can do anything until the election result is known. You'll all just have to fend for yourselves"''. There's virtually no time when we don't have a government. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<font face="Papyrus"><sup>[your turn]</sup></font>]] 08:22, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:::::::You think ''that's'' bad? See [[2010–2011 Belgian government formation]] and [[2007–2011 Belgian political crisis]]. No government for 541 days! After a while, being in Caretaker mode becomes awfully tricky - particularly when you're dealing with major crises such as that currently affecting the eurozone. Yet for the most part, Belgium didn't go into meltdown, and the crisis was eventually resolved. [[Special:Contributions/58.111.186.225|58.111.186.225]] ([[User talk:58.111.186.225|talk]]) 18:11, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
:For the OP, I did try googling for what the UN's official role is in such situations, but couldn't find anything specific. I think it's safe to say the army would step in, the UN would try to help, and terrorists would try to exploit the situation using any and every means at their disposal. But unless they were the ones who crashed the plane, they would be unprepared to take advantage of it, so there would be a mess for a while, and order would be restored. Beyond that, we don't know, that's why you get to make movies about it - no one can prove you wrong when you speculate about the unknown. I think John Goodman would run the country for a while, then Peter O'Toole would take over. [[User:It&#39;s Been Emotional|IBE]] ([[User talk:It&#39;s Been Emotional|talk]]) 08:54, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
::In countries whose government is a ''system'' rather than a cult of personality, a quick return to stability is much more likely. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 09:53, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


== Can Biden commute Military Death Row sentences? ==
:Since the situation described is somewhat of a long shot (not only would the hypothetical disaster have to affect all of the 19 people specifically named in the [[United States presidential succession]], but would also have to account for the fact that at least one of those people would almost certainly not be in the same place, as per [[Designated survivor]]), the answer you're looking for is probably contained within one of the works listed in [[Fiction regarding United States presidential succession]]. - [[User:Cucumber Mike|Cucumber Mike]] ([[User talk:Cucumber Mike|talk]]) 11:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
::You might also find [http://www.continuityofgovernment.org/SecondReport.pdf this report] (PDF) interesting. It deals with a hypothetical situation exactly as described, with many Cabinet members, Senators and Representatives dead or disabled, and confusion over who has the physical capabilities and/or authority to lead the country. Effectively, the answer is that after a few hours and days of [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/faff faffing around], during which time the [[Speaker of the United States House of Representatives]] declares [[Martial law]], enough people with the good sense and authority required to deal with the situation have gathered, and unite behind a former [[Secretary of State]] to guide the nation through the immediate crisis until the next election. Basically, in the absence of anything else to do, people will Just Get On With It (TM). - [[User:Cucumber Mike|Cucumber Mike]] ([[User talk:Cucumber Mike|talk]]) 11:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
For a very similar scenario, see [[Jack_Ryan_(Tom_Clancy_character)#Presidency|this section of the Jack Ryan article]] (warning:spoilers) --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 12:54, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


Biden commuted nearly all of the Federal Death Row sentences a few days ago. Now, what’s the deal with the Military Death Row inmates? Are they considered "federal" and under the purview of Biden? Or, if not, what’s the distinction? Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 02:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I don't think the hypothetical is realistic. The secret service is careful to ensure that those in the line of Presidential succession do not travel together on one single plane - One of them ''always'' travels separately (or remains behind) so if something ''did'' happen, there would be ''someone'' who will legitimately assume the Presidency. [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 13:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


:[https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/state-and-federal-info/military/facts-and-figures This page] and the various tabs you can click from there include a lot of information. There hasn't been a military execution since 1961 and there are only four persons on the military death row at this point. The President does have the power to commute a death sentence issued under the [[Uniform Code of Military Justice]]. It is not clear why President Biden did not address those four cases when he commuted the sentences of most federal death row inmates a few days ago, although two of the four cases (see [https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/state-and-federal-info/military/descriptions-of-cases-for-those-sentenced-to-death-in-u-s-military here]) are linked to terrorism, so would likely not have been commuted anyway. [[User:Xuxl|Xuxl]] ([[User talk:Xuxl|talk]]) 14:45, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Do you need the secret service for that? Sounds like a pretty easy task, not to get 19 people together into something, indeed, getting 19 people together, no matter who, might be more difficult than how it looks like. Anyway, the answer to the hypothetical questions is: there are still US-governors, which could get their state business running, and form a council to run the US. [[Special:Contributions/88.8.69.150|88.8.69.150]] ([[User talk:88.8.69.150|talk]]) 21:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:::::See the [[Lincoln assassination]] for why. Even back then decapitation attacks targeted several levels of leadership. [[User:Rmhermen|Rmhermen]] ([[User talk:Rmhermen|talk]]) 17:40, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Probably Eric Cantor. The presidency would go to who ever is elected the next speaker. As cantor is probably the most powerfull member of congress, he could get himself elected speaker and their by become president. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.189.55.52|66.189.55.52]] ([[User talk:66.189.55.52|talk]]) 13:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


Thanks. Does anyone have any idea about why Biden did not commute these death sentences? [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 06:17, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
*Getting back to the question, the states through various means would appoint new senators who would chose a [[President Pro Tem]] who would get to act as President. Note the states can't appoint members to the House of Reps on an emergency basis, though it's been debated. <span style="color:#FF2400">'''Hot Stop'''</span> <sup>[[User:Hot Stop|U]][[User talk:Hot Stop|T]][[Special:Contributions/Hot Stop|C]]</sup> 15:40, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


Thanks, all. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 06:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
*It should also be noted that any succession beyond the VP is untested, and therefore an open question anyways. Even succession ''by'' the vice president was a messy and controversial matter the first time it happened (see [[John_Tyler#.22His_Accidency.22|John Tyler]] ) and was not resolved ''legally'' until the [[Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution]], passed in 1967, well over 100 years after it first became an issue. Given the issues that Tyler faced when he became President, any succession involving the Speaker of the House or a Cabinet member or the like is quite likely to result in a [[constitutional crisis]], having ''something'' written into law doesn't mean that what is written is sufficient. --[[User:Jayron32|<font style="color:#000099">Jayron</font>]]'''''[[User talk:Jayron32|<font style="color:#009900">32</font>]]''''' 00:29, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:There's also one possibility that wasn't previously mentioned. The Constitution (between the original document and the amendments) lays out ways to get new people in all the offices in question without the standard elections, except for the president. In such a situation, special elections could be held for the House and governors could appoint new senators, and it would be possible (and given the situation, probably rather likely) that one of the first actions of the new Congress would be to pass a constitutional amendment to provide for a special election for president in such a situation; note that the president doesn't play a part in amending the Constitution. Given the [[Articles of Confederation|obvious problems of having no executive]], I strongly suspect that the state legislatures would speedily approve such an amendment — there's no constitutional minimum time for the adoption of a constitutional amendment, so if everyone agreed that an amendment was needed immediately, it could be adopted just about immediately. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 04:01, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
::But the Senate would first appoint a pro tem who would then become president and no need for any amendment. [[User:Rmhermen|Rmhermen]] ([[User talk:Rmhermen|talk]]) 17:40, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
I think you're all over-looking the most obvious result. In every case I know of where a sudden power vacuum has appeared in governance without any clear system in place (and that happens more frequently than you know in out-of-the-way nations), the military has stepped in, at least pro-tem. If the major players are all taken out of the picture at the same time, the army is the only organization that has the scale of coordination necessary to ensure a nation continues functioning as a cohesive whole (not to mention that any act which took out all of the top players would almost ''certainly'' be interpreted as an act of war requiring military intervention). With luck the army will maintain order while the slow process of rebuilding civilian command occurs; without it, think permanent [[military junta]]. --[[User_talk:Ludwigs2|<span style="color:darkblue;font-weight:bold">Ludwigs</span><span style="color:green;font-weight:bold">2</span>]] 04:47, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
::I wonder if it would work that way in the US. The US military seems like a different sort of organization in its domestic role than the militaries of junta states were, even before the juntas. The US Army is just not a politically very powerful entity on the domestic level — they take domestic instructions, rarely give them (other than "please give us money for this cool jet"). My guess would be whatever state government of whatever was the most well-positioned state after said crisis would probably hold a lot of power. Anyway, I think the bottom line is, it hasn't happened before, it isn't clear what would happen. In most cases where that has happened in the US so far (e.g. the first succession to the Presidency by the Vice-President), people just sort of made it up as they went along, and codified it later. I'm sure people would muddle through as they always do. --[[User:Mr.98|Mr.98]] ([[User talk:Mr.98|talk]]) 14:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


{{resolved}}
== Was [[Henry Ward Beecher]] [[colonel]] in an [[USCT]] regiment ? ==


== Coca Romano's portraits of Ferdinand and Marie of Romania ==
Hello Learned People !
I just translated from WP ''de'' to WP ''fr'' the ''deutsch'' article about [[William N. Reed]] (first & only colored lieutenant colonel during the A.C.W., dead 39 years old after the [[battle of Olustee]]) , & was puzzled to read that "''Dienst im '1st North Carolina Colored Volunteer Regiment, das nur aus farbigen Freiwilliger bestand. Der [[Regimentskommandeur]] war [[Henry Ward Beecher]]. Reed wurde [[Oberstleutnant]]...''".


I am trying to work out when Coca Romano's coronation portraits of Ferdinand and Marie of Romania were actually completed and unveiled. This is with an eye to possibly uploading a photo of them to this wiki: they are certainly still in copyright in Romania (Romano lived until 1983), but probably not in the U.S. because of publication date.
Has [[Henry Ward Beecher]] really been a colonel in an USCT regiment ? I read in WP ''en'' [[Edward A. Wild]] that Wild helped a half-brother of Mrs Beecher Stowe to join the USCT ...


The coronation took place in 1922 at Alba Iulia. The portraits show Ferdinand and Marie in their full regalia that they wore at the coronation. They appear to have been based on photographs taken at the coronation, so they must have been completed after the event, not before.
Thank you beforehand for your answers. T.y. [[User:Arapaima|Arapaima]] ([[User talk:Arapaima|talk]]) 18:33, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


A few pieces of information I have: there is no date on the canvasses. The pieces are in the collection of the Brukenthal National Museum in Sibiu (inventory numbers 2503 for the picture of Marie and 2504 for Ferdinand) [Reference for undated and for inventory numbers: [ [https://biblioteca-digitala.ro/reviste/Brukenthal-Acta-Musei/dl.asp?filename=10-4_Brukenthal-Acta-Musei_X-4-restaurare_2015.pdf], p. 36-37], and were on display this year at Art Safari in Bucharest, which is where I photographed them. If they were published (always a tricky concept for a painting, but I'm sure they were rapidly and widely reproduced) no later than 1928, or in a few days 1929, we can upload my photo in this wiki. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] &#124; [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 04:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:It was Col. James Chaplin Beecher (1828-1886) who commanded the 39th United States Colored Troops (First North Carolina Colored Volunteers)[http://battleofolustee.org/35th_usct.html]; he was a half-brother of both Harriet Beecher Stowe and Henry Ward Beecher.


(I've uploaded the image to Flickr, if anyone wants a look: https://www.flickr.com/photos/jmabel/54225746973/). - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] &#124; [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 05:25, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:Henry Ward Beecher and his sister Harriet Beecher Stowe were children of [[Lyman Beecher]] (1775-1863) and his 1st wife, neé Roxanna Foote (1775-1816). James Chaplin Beecher was the son of Lyman Beecher (1775-1863) and his 2nd wife, neé Harriet Porter (1790-1835). Lyman Beecher married a 3rd time, to Lydia Beals Johnson (1789-1869). - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 22:58, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


== Was it ever mentioned in the Bible that the enslaved Jews in Egypt were forced to build the pyramids? ==
== What significance does voter registration have in the US, and is your registration public? ==


The question as topic. I'm pretty rusty on the good book, but I don't recall that it was ever directly specified in Exodus, or anywhere else. But it seems to be something that is commonly assumed. [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 23:39, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
I was reading this article (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/23/trump-dumps-gop/?hpt=hp_t2) and was confused by a couple of things.


:According to [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPkbfd--C3M&t=66s this video], the story that the pyramids were built with slave labour is a myth; the builders were skilled workers, "engineers, craftsmen, architects, the best of the best". The people of the children of Israel being forced to work for the Pharaoh is mentioned in [[Book of Exodus|Exodus]] {{bibleverse-nb||Exodus|1:11|31}}: "{{tq|So they put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh.}}". The pyramids are not mentioned in the Bible. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 02:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
It said that Trump changed "his voter registration Thursday from Republican to unaffiliated", and that "the change was made with the New York State Board of Elections".
::Thank you. I thought that was the case. It's been 30 years since I read the Bible from cover to cover (I mainly just have certain passages highlighted now that I find helpful). But I do remember Zionist people very recently online Facebook claiming that the Jews built the pyramids and that Egyptian nationalists can go fuck themselves with their historical complaints about Israeli invasions of the Sinai Peninsula. [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 02:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Right. You people can't help yourselves, can you? You didn't have to read the Bible cover to cover to find the answer. It's there in the first paragraphs of the book of Exodus. But you were looking for an excuse to talk about "Zionist people", weren't you? Of course any connection between pyramids and the Sinai is nonsensical (if it was actually made and you didn't just make it up) and there are idiots everywhere including among "Zionist people". Except you're no better, since you decided to post a fake question just to have an excuse to move the "conversation" from Facebook to Wikipedia. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 03:36, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
::::You are mistaken. I support Israel 100%. I maybe shouldn't have said "Zionist" but I had a few drinks - what is the correct term to use for people who support Israel??. I was legit interested from half the world away about some historical arguments I saw online. [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 03:50, 26 December 2024 (UTC)


:Anyway, Egyptian pyramids (certainly stone pyramids) were mainly an Old Kingdom thing, dating from long before Hyksos rule or Egyptian territorial involvement in the Levant. At most times likely to be relevant to the Exodus narrative, the [[Valley of the Kings]] was being used for royal burials... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 03:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
What is the significance of registering your party affiliation? If you do register it, is it public? Why would anyone register rather than just be private about it. [[User_talk:Sanchom|Sancho]] 22:24, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
::The chief pyramid-building era was around the 26th century BCE. Exodus, if it happened, would have been around the 13th century BCE, 1300 years later. A long time; we tend to misunderstand how long the ancient Egyptian period was. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">[[User:Acroterion|<span style="color: black;">Acroterion</span>]] <small>[[User talk:Acroterion|<span style="color: gray;">(talk)</span>]]</small></span>''' 04:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:Well, this isn't something that can be answered for "the US". It's entirely a state question. In states with a [[closed primary]] system, you generally need to indicate a party in order to vote in that party's primary.
:::One factoid that turns up here and there is that Cleopatra, as ancient as she is to us, is chronologically closer to our time than to the time the pyramids were built. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 14:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:In California, at least, it's a matter of public record. Don't know about New York. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 22:30, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
::A follow-up, then: why does the state have an interest in tracking how parties hold their primaries? It seems like that should be a matter internal to the particular party. If a third national party was created, would it be bound to select its presidential candidate in a manner prescribed by the individual states? [[User_talk:Sanchom|Sancho]] 22:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
:::Well, now you're getting into the fundamental weirdness of the whole idea of the party primary election. On the one hand, in theory, parties are just groups of like-minded people who agree to pick a common person to support. At the Federal level they aren't very formally part of the process at all; the Constitution, for example, doesn't mention them even once.
:::So it's a bit strange that state governments hold elections to determine what's really an internal matter for parties. The perception, though, is that if you ''don't'' do that, then the candidates get chosen by party bosses in a "smoke-filled room" and the public has no input until the general election, by which time there may be no one they really want to vote for.
:::So the primary system has a fundamental internal tension; it's a weird sort of bastard child of two incompatible models, but not too many people really want to get rid of it.
:::As far as third national parties, well, there are several, and no, they are not bound to pay attention to the primary system. Neither are the Republicans and Democrats, for that matter &mdash; if they ''want'' to pick their candidates by some purely internal procedure they are at liberty to do so. Presumably they think the political cost would be too high (assuming they actually want to do it). --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 22:47, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
::::As for why the states or federal government would want to track how parties hold their primaries, at least part of it has to do with the history of party primaries being used as a tool to exclude racial minorities from participation in the political process up to the mid-20th century. For more, I'd recommend starting with our article on [[white primaries]] (and the Supreme Court decision that banned them, 1944's ''[[Smith v. Allwright]]'')--from there, you might want to read up on the [[solid South]]. Hope this helps! [[User:Meelar|Meelar]] [[User talk:Meelar|(talk)]] 00:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC) P.S. I used to work with voter files regularly, and this matter does vary significantly depending on what state you're in. One reason that people might want to register publicly is as a form of social signaling, the same as putting up a yard sign for a candidate; it's an active topic in [[political science]].
::We also should mention that some states have caucuses and not primaries at all. Even your "vote" is public then. I am not sure if you can do cross-party voting in states where you are required to register your party. We know Obama will get his party's nomination so Dem's vote on the Republican primary to try to get a weaker candidate for the opposition. [[User:Rmhermen|Rmhermen]] ([[User talk:Rmhermen|talk]]) 01:25, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:::{{small|True, although this time around the GOP is doing a pretty good job at that task all by themselves. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 02:16, 24 December 2011 (UTC)}}
:::: Taking part in ''another'' party's voting procedures in order to advantage ''your'' party? Your votes being on the ''public record''? ... This is all head-scratching stuff for me, all so completely foreign to my concept of how these things are done. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<font face="Papyrus"><sup>[your turn]</sup></font>]] 02:35, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
::::: Primary elections in the U.S. lie in a fuzzy territory between government and private organization. After all, political parties are NOT government agencies, and so are not bound by basic rules regarding elections. The U.S. does have a strict [[secret ballot]] for any official elections, but the "Primaries" are about political parties choosing their candidates to run in the official elections. How a private organization decides to choose its candidates is entirely its own business. The federal government generally doesn't get involved. Additionally, because of the sort of divided federalism that exists in the U.S., each state's own political parties are semi-independent from the national-level parties, and thus run their own business seperately. That's why every state runs a different primary election, each uses different voting systems, sometimes different parties in the same state will run a different sort of election. Take a look, for example, at Texas. The [[Texas Republican primary, 2008]] was run completely differently from the [[Texas Democratic primary and caucuses, 2008]]. These elections are run, not by any government agency, but by the political parties. That's why they work "weird". --[[User:Jayron32|<font style="color:#000099">Jayron</font>]]'''''[[User talk:Jayron32|<font style="color:#009900">32</font>]]''''' 02:43, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


= December 26 =
::::::Who provides manpower, locations and other resources to hold primaries? The parties, the state or a combination? [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] ([[User talk:PrimeHunter|talk]]) 03:23, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


== What would the president Trump brokered peace treaty in Ukraine look like? ==
:::::::It varies WILDLY as to which state. The idea of a formal election primary came about from the progessive movement of the early 20th century in the U.S., and to this day, not all states have "caught on". Iowa, for example, still has the [[Iowa caucuses]], and information is located in that article as to how those are run. In some states, primary party elections occur in conjunction with other official elections, so there may be semi-state sponsorship. In others they are wholly independent from the states. --[[User:Jayron32|<font style="color:#000099">Jayron</font>]]'''''[[User talk:Jayron32|<font style="color:#009900">32</font>]]''''' 03:39, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


I know this is probably speculation, but going by what I've read in a few articles - how would the new president sort this out?
::::::::Thanks. Perhaps Iowa also wants to remain first and could get into a ridiculous rescheduling war with [[New Hampshire primary#Timing|New Hampshire]] if they changed to a primary. [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] ([[User talk:PrimeHunter|talk]]) 00:50, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


- the war stops
:In California, which is the only state I can really speak on, the state does run the primaries, in that the state government decides ''when'' the primaries will be held. Because California's primary was so late in the process compared to other states, most party nominees had been chosen by the time that California's primary came around, so a few years ago, the state legislature moved the California primary up so as to have greater influence on the nomination. But, since the Democrats control the legislature, and because Obama is the foregone conclusion candidate of the Democratic Party, the state legislature moved the primary ''back'' this year to June, where it usually was, thus denying the Republicans in California from having much influence in the Republican nomination process. In addition, a state proposition passed a couple of years ago making the California primary an [[open primary]]. Thus the top two vote getters will move on the general election, regardless of party. The state also runs non-partisan elections at the same time, so as not to waste money by holding a different election at a different time. Such positions as judges, who are non-partisan, and water district board members, etc., hold elections at that time. Because of the top two moving on to the general election, it's likely that in places like San Francisco, the top two will either be both Democrats, or a Democrat and a Green Party candidate. In places such as Orange County, it's possible that both candidates could be Republicans. The primaries are also used to choose general election candidates for House of Representatives, Senate, and state legislature. [[User:The Mark of the Beast|The Mark of the Beast]] ([[User talk:The Mark of the Beast|talk]]) 05:53, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
::That doesn't make sense. How can California send delegates to the Republican national conference with the intention of voting for a Democrat? The Democrats aren't running for the Republican nomination... --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 14:10, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:::That's because California doesn't use a party primary system (apparently), instead it uses a two-stage election, whereby the first election (called the Primary) establishes the top two candidates to run in the second electrion (the General election). This isn't disallowed by any principles that I know of. --[[User:Jayron32|<font style="color:#000099">Jayron</font>]]'''''[[User talk:Jayron32|<font style="color:#009900">32</font>]]''''' 15:38, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
::::I think the new version of the California primary (which hasn't actually been used yet; it's that new) does not apply to the presidential race. It's hard to see how it could.
::::The new version is not so much a primary as it is [[two-round voting]]; parties have no formal role, except that maybe your party affiliation gets listed on the ballot. In principle, we could also do two-round voting for the slate of electors California sends to the [[electoral college]]. But if we did that, then it's a plausible scenario that the two candidates who make it to the general election are not the same as the national candidates from the two major parties. In fact, perhaps ''neither'' of them would be. In which case California might wind up choosing a slate of electors pledged to a candidate who's not really in the race, and that could easily throw the election into the House of Representatives for the first time since, if I recall correctly, 1824. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 19:42, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:::::There is a consortium of states which are attempting to sidestep the Electoral College by pledging that, if enough states agree (a majority of the Electoral Votes), the state's Electors will pledge to vote for the Presidential candidate who receives the most votes nationwide, even if they don't get the most votes in the state. California is one of those which has pledged to do that. This hasn't come to pass yet, becuase not enough states have agreed. There's probably a Wikipedia article on this, but I have no idea even how to look for it. [[User:The Mark of the Beast|The Mark of the Beast]] ([[User talk:The Mark of the Beast|talk]]) 20:00, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
::::::See [[National Popular Vote Interstate Compact]]. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 20:19, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:::::::If that compact were to be come reality, it would alter some of the details of the question, but I still don't see how it would make it viable for California to use two-round voting for the presidential election. You could still wind up with a situation where California's general-election ballot has two candidates for president, neither of whom has a chance at the national level. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 20:53, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
::::::::Actually, this kind of brings up what I think is a potential flaw in the National Popular Vote idea. I'm sure it's ''legal'', at least if approved by Congress under the [[Compact Clause]]. I'm not sure it's ''enforceable''. Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't expect a state legislature to back out of the agreement after the popular election, because it would bring too much criticism, but legally I expect they ''could''.
::::::::So let's suppose that California extends two-round voting to the presidential election, and then in some future election, let's say [[Anna Eshoo]] and [[Jerry Brown]] are the top two finishers in the first round. But nationally, the Democrats pick [[Bill Richardson]] and the Republicans pick [[John Huntsman]] (both excellent choices btw).
::::::::Then in November, Californians are shut out of voting for either Richardson or Huntsman, and go for Eshoo, who has no chance of winning the national popular vote. The total national popular vote favors Huntsman, but if you added Eshoo's votes to Richardson's, he would win.
::::::::Wouldn't there be huge pressure on the California legislature to back out of the deal, and appoint a slate pledged to Richardson?
::::::::Our article does not seem to discuss the enforceability aspect. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 21:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:::::::::That is getting into the realm of [[unpledged elector]]s, [[faithless elector]]s and just plain errors, instead of primaries. [[User:Rmhermen|Rmhermen]] ([[User talk:Rmhermen|talk]]) 22:16, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:::::::::: I don't see what it has to do with faithless electors. The Constitution gives state legislatures a direct grant of authority to choose electors. There's no limitation on how they do it, but also no indication that any commitment they make on how they do it can be binding. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 06:44, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
:::::::::::I see a mix of "red" and "blue" states in that consortium, and if they stop and think about it, one presidential election could be enough to cure them of this notion. Let's suppose Obama gets more popular votes than Romney, but Romney wins some particular red state in the list, and that state's electoral votes swing the election to Romney instead of Obama. However, due to the consortium, that red state's electors would be compelled to vote for Obama even though their citizenry wanted Romney. That would go over like a lead balloon. People forget that it is the ''states'' which elect the president, not the individual citizens. It was set up that way in the constitution for the same reason the bicameral congress was set up: to provide a check against the large, populous states from totally overwhelming the smaller ones. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 19:21, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


- Russia withdraws all troops from the invaded regions of Ukraine
Thanks. These answers have been helpful and interesting! Back to my original question, Trump would have been able to run as an independent regardless of his registration in the state of new york, correct? [[User_talk:Sanchom|Sancho]] 21:31, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:I'm not an expert on New York election law, but I think you're almost certainly correct. It would be extremely weird for a state to stipulate that, if you're registered with a party, then you can run for office only as a candidate of that party. Having said that, I don't know any specific reason that such a law would be unconstitutional. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 22:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
::Oh, wait a minute, I forgot we're talking about the presidential race. I'm sure it would be unconstitutional for New York to restrict Trump from running in other states. I don't know under what clause, exactly, but it's just part of that corpus of things that it's understood states can't do. At most they could keep him off the ballot in New York. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 22:10, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:::I'm also 99% sure that Trump could run as an independent, regardless of his party registration, and I'm pretty sure that preventing him from doing so would infringe on his [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] rights. That kind of law, restricting participation on electoral participation, is right at the heart of the First and it would be tough to mess around with. [[User:Meelar|Meelar]] [[User talk:Meelar|(talk)]] 03:05, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
::::He could, but if he was a party ''member'' running an unendorsed campaign against his party's "official" candidate, wouldn't he risk being expelled from the party? When [[Joe Lieberman]] didn't get the Democratic party nomination for the 2006 Connecticut seat, he did indeed run as an independent. [[Special:Contributions/58.111.186.225|58.111.186.225]] ([[User talk:58.111.186.225|talk]]) 18:58, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
::::: In the United States, there's no tradition of people being "expelled" from parties. Most people who consider themselves to belong to a particular party have no formal affiliation with the party beyond their voter registration, in states where you state a party on your registration, and none at all in states where you don't. So there's nothing to be expelled ''from''.
::::: Now, if you're an elected legislator, the party in charge of the house can certainly decline to recognize you as a member of the party for the purpose of committee assignments and so on. Is that what you meant by "expelled"? --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 19:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
::::::I suppose I'm wrong in that case, at least as far as the U.S. is concerned. Here in Australia, there ''is'' such a thing as formal party membership, complete with membership applications and fees. You need to have at least 500 members to register a party. Lieberman reached a deal allowing him to keep his chairmanship of the Governmental Affairs Committee. But if you want a position of ''any'' sort in the party apparatus, I think you'd be mighty unlikely, as a rebel, to get it - unless you have bargaining power, as Senator Lieberman happened to have, given the hung senate at the time. [[Special:Contributions/58.111.186.225|58.111.186.225]] ([[User talk:58.111.186.225|talk]]) 19:54, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


- Ukraine withdraws all troops from the same regions
= December 24 =


- these regions become a DMZ, under control of neither party for the next 25 years, patrolled by the United Nations (or perhaps the USA/Britain and China/North Korea jointly)
== Anonymous Authors ==


- Russia promises to leave Ukraine alone for 25 years
I'm looking for information about book authors who remained anonymous. How did they communicate with the publisher? How did they get paid if their bank account can't be anonymously attributed to them? etc. Thanks, 17:47, 24 December 2011 (UTC) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/46.116.226.68|46.116.226.68]] ([[User talk:46.116.226.68|talk]]) </span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


- Ukraine promises not to join NATO or the EU for 25 years
:They are not anonymous to their publisher. [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster ]] [[User_talk:Kittybrewster|<font color="0000FF">&#9742;</font>]] 18:28, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


- A peace treaty will be signed
:Someone has to know who they are. So either the publisher or a go-between of some sort. Or the money is left in a sack somewhere, but that seems unlikely. ;-) --[[User:Mr.98|Mr.98]] ([[User talk:Mr.98|talk]]) 01:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


- The can will be kicked down the road for 25 years, at which point more discussions or wars will commence
:In some cases, they may not have been paid for their work. Somebody writing something "subversive" under an oppressive government might have operated the printing press personally and left copies where others would find them. These days, with the Internet, anonymous online posting is far easier (like what we are doing right now). [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 06:13, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


So maybe the Americans will say "this is the best deal you're going to get, in the future we're going to be spending our money on our own people and no-one else - if you don't take it, we'll let the Russians roll right over you and good luck to you".
::Thanks. And what about examples of pen names or books of anonymous authors? [[Special:Contributions/85.250.163.208|85.250.163.208]] ([[User talk:85.250.163.208|talk]]) 12:29, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


Is this basically what is being said now? I think this is what Vance envisioned. [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 03:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:::The famous Chinese novel ''[[Journey to the West]]'' was anonymously published in 1592. The author remained unknown until the early 20th century. A Chinese scholar connected the book with [[Wu Cheng'en]] in the 1920s. However, modern scholarship has cast doubt on the connection. --[[User:Ghostexorcist|Ghostexorcist]] ([[User talk:Ghostexorcist|talk]]) 15:44, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
:{{small|The downside is that the residents of the buffer zone will be compelled to eat their pets. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 03:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}}
::{{small|Or each other's pets. [[User:Tamfang|—Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 21:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)}}


:You seem to be overlooking one of the major obstacles to peace -- unless it suffers a stinging military defeat, Russia won't withdraw from territories belonging to 1990s Ukraine which it's formally annexed -- Crimea and [[Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts|Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia]]... -- [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 03:14, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:::For a more recent example, [[Joe Klein]] published [[Primary Colors (novel)|''Primary Colors]] anonymously and kept it that way for seven months in 1996 before being unmasked. [[User:Meelar|Meelar]] [[User talk:Meelar|(talk)]] 17:59, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
::You're right, Russia won't withdraw from territories belonging to 1990s Ukraine, but it is likely that Ukraine does not expect Russia to do so too. Restoring to pre-war territories and the independent of [[Crimea|Crimean]], [[Donetsk Oblast|Donetsk]], [[Kherson Oblast|Kherson]], [[Luhansk Oblast|Luhansk]], and [[Zaporizhzhia Oblast|Zaporizhzhia]] are the best Ukraine can hope for. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 10:10, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:Never heard of any such plan. 25 years? This is completely made up. Can't say I'm surprised since this is the same guy who asked the previous "question". My understanding is that Wikipedia and the Reference Desk are not a forum for debate. This is not Facebook. But this guy seems to think otherwise. Anyway, there's no way that the territories Russia has annexed will ever go back to the Ukraine. The only question which remains is what guarantees can be given to Ukraine that Russia will never try something like this ever again and eat it up piecemeal. The best answer (from Ukraine's point of view) would have been that it join NATO but of course Russia won't have it. If not that, then what? This's exactly where the "art of the deal" comes in. Speculating in advance on Wikipedia is pointless. Better to do that on Facebook. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 03:49, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
::You're right, by policy Wikipedia is not a forum and [[WP:SOAP|not a soapbox]]. But attend also to the policy [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks]]. Oh, and the guideline [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] is another good one. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 10:27, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Further, it's a bit pointless to tell an OP that WP is not a forum or a soapbox, but then immediately engage in debate with them about the matter they raise. -- [[User:JackofOz|<span style="font-family: Papyrus;">Jack of Oz</span>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<span style="font-size:85%; font-family: Verdana;"><sup>[pleasantries]</sup></span>]] 18:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:A politician's butt dominates his brain. What he is going to do is more important than what he had said. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:Expect that a concept of a peace plan will be ready soon after day one. Until then we can only speculate whose concept. Will it be Musk's, Trump's, Vance's, Rubio's, Hegseth's, Kellogg's? The latter's plan is believed to involve Ukraine ceding the Donbas and Luhansk regions, as well as Crimea, to Russia,<sup>[https://www.reuters.com/world/trumps-plan-ukraine-comes-into-focus-territorial-concessions-nato-off-table-2024-12-04/]</sup> after which the negotiators can proclaim: "[[Mission Accomplished speech|Mission accomplished]]. [[Peace for our time]]." &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 10:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)


:* There may also be peace plans required for a possible US incursion in Canada and Greenland / Denmark. All three are members of the NATO, so this may be tricky. --[[User:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM]] ([[User talk:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|talk]]) 18:42, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
== James Cook's feather cloak(s) ==


Isn't this one of those "crystal ball" things we are supposed to avoid here? - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] &#124; [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 21:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Does anybody know how many [[ʻahuʻula|Hawaiian feather cloaks]] of Captain [[James Cook]] exist in museums around the world. And is the one currently in the [[Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa]] the same one as the one that was in the [[Australian Museum]] in 1899?--[[User:KAVEBEAR|KAVEBEAR]] ([[User talk:KAVEBEAR|talk]]) 19:40, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


:{{agree}} [[User:Slowking Man|Slowking Man]] ([[User talk:Slowking Man|talk]]) 00:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
== Der Holle Rache ==
::If the OP provided an actual source for this claim, then it could be discussed more concretely. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 00:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::It is not a claim, but a question, "What is being said now about the prospects and form of a Trump-brokered peace treaty?" Should the OP provide a source for this question? If the question is hard to answer, it is not by lack of sources (I gave one above), but because all kinds of folks are saying all kinds of things about it. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 19:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:Whatever the plan may be, Putin reportedly doesn't like it.<sup>[https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-december-26-2024]</sup> &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 22:38, 28 December 2024 (UTC)


== ID card replacement ==
This is probably one of the most difficult arie to sing, and the F<sub>6</sub> has tripped up many a soprano. Of the recordings of this aria I've listened to in every one there is something around this spot (right after 'so bist du meine Tochter nimmermehr') that is not right - the soprano either "squeaks" on the high F or else hits the F but at the expense of some of the surrounding notes. Are there any recordings available online of this aria being sung perfectly or near-perfectly? If so, I'd appreciate links - even if I might have heard the recording before. Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/24.92.85.35|24.92.85.35]] ([[User talk:24.92.85.35|talk]]) 22:55, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
:I'm not familiar with this aria, but a similarly difficult aria is the Mad scene from [[Lucia di Lammermoor]]. Our article says that Maria Callas and Dame Joan Sutherland performed this role with distinction, so I wonder if they also recorded the aria you're looking for? --[[User:TammyMoet|TammyMoet]] ([[User talk:TammyMoet|talk]]) 11:02, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


In California you can get a drivers' license (DL) from the DMV, which both serves as an ID card and attests that you are authorized to drive a car. Alternatively, from the same DMV, you can get a state ID card, which is the same as a DL except it doesn't let you drive. The card looks similar and the process for getting it (wait in line, fill in forms, get picture taken) is similar, though of course there is no driving test.
: I assume you've checked out our article [[Der Hölle Rache kocht in meinem Herzen]], which says that [[Edda Moser]]'s recording was chosen for Voyager 1, so it must have been considered pretty special. It also mentions the notorious [[Florence Foster Jenkins]], whose recording is worth hearing for the novelty value of its utter awfulness, but for no other reason, I promise you. Also have a look at [[The Magic Flute discography]] for the names of some noted singers of the important roles. It's not complete, but it's a start. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<font face="Papyrus"><sup>[your turn]</sup></font>]] 11:39, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


If you need a replacement drivers' license, you can request it online or through one of the DMV's self-service kiosks installed in various locations. That's reasonably convenient.
: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OP9SX7V14Z4 Here's] the much lamented [[Lucia Popp]] doing it admirably (it says Cecilia Bartoli but that's wrong).

: PS. Those reading this thread may not know the aria under its incipit, but might know "'''The Queen of the Night's Aria'''". -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<font face="Papyrus"><sup>[your turn]</sup></font>]] 18:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
If you need a replacement ID card, you have to request it in person at a DMV office, involving travel, waiting in line, dealing with crowds, etc. DMV appointment shortens the wait but doesn't get rid of it. Plus the earliest available appointments are several weeks out.

My mom is elderly, doesn't drive, doesn't handle travel or waiting in line well, and needs a replacement ID card. I'm wondering why this discrepancy exists in the replacement process. Not looking for legal advice etc. but am just wondering if I'm overlooking something sane, rather than reflexive [[system justification]]. Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D|2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D]] ([[User talk:2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D|talk]]) 19:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

:European (Brit) here, so responding with logic rather than knowledge, but . . . . If a replacement ID could be requested remotely and sent, it would probably be easier for some nefarious person to do so and obtain a fake ID; at least if attendance is required, the officials can tell that the 25-y-o illegal immigrant (say) they're seeing in front of them doesn't match the photo they already have of the elderly lady whose 'replacement' ID is being requested.
:Drivers' licences have the additional safeguard that drivers are occasionally (often?) stopped by traffic police and asked to produce them, at which point discrepancies may be evident. {The poster formerly known as 87.812.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 00:30, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks, I guess there is some sense to that, though I haven't been stopped by police in quite a few years. I reached the DMV by phone and they say they won't issue an actual duplicate ID card: rather, they want to take a new picture of my mom and use that on the new card. Of course that's fine given that we have to go there anyway, but it's another way the DL procedure is different. [[Special:Contributions/2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D|2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D]] ([[User talk:2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D|talk]]) 00:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::What purpose does the ID card serve? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 04:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
::::See [[Identity documents in the United States]]. These cards can be used for such purposes as boarding a plane, purchasing alcohol or cigarettes where proof of age is required, cashing a check, etc. Most folks use their driver's license for these purposes, but for the minority that does not drive, some form of official id is required from time to time, hence the delivery of such cards by states. --[[User:Xuxl|Xuxl]] ([[User talk:Xuxl|talk]]) 13:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::I'm just wondering under what circumstances a shut-in would ever use it. The OP could maybe explain. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 21:52, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::OP did not describe a "shut-in". And anyway, have you ever heard the well-known phrase-or-saying "none of your fucking business"? [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 21:59, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Are you the OP? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 22:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::Not OP and not a shut-in, but ID is necessary for registration for some online services (including ID requirements for access to some state and federal websites that administer things like taxes and certain benefits). I've had to provide photos/scans of photo ID digitally for a couple other purposes, too, though I can't remember off the top of my head what those were. I think one might have been to verify an I-9 form for employment. And the ID number from my driver's license for others. At least a couple instances have been with private entities rather than governments. The security implications always make me wary. -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 23:05, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Virtually all of the private information of US citizens has been repeatedly compromised in the last decade. Not a single company or government entity has faced consequences, and no US legislation is in the works to protect our private information in the future. For only one small example, the personal info of 73 million AT&T account holders was released on the dark web this year.[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68701958] In the US, if you're a private company, you can do just about anything and get away with it. If you're a private citizen, there's an entirely separate set of laws for you. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 21:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
:Unless someone affiliated with the CA DMV drops by here, I'm afraid none of us are going to be able to tell you why something is the way it is with them. Essentially it's requesting people to guess or predict at why X ''might'' be the case. Have you tried [https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/contacting-dmv/ contacting them] and asking them for an answer? You and/or her could also [https://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/ contact] her CA state elected representatives and let them know your feelings on the matter. Sometimes representatives' offices will assist a constitutent with issues they're having involving government services ("constitutent services"). --[[User:Slowking Man|Slowking Man]] ([[User talk:Slowking Man|talk]]) 01:43, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:If your mom is old and her medical condition affects her ability to perform daily activities (she couldn't handle the travel or waiting in line well), she can ask her medical doctor to complete a DS 3234 (Medical Certification) form to verify her status. Then you can help her to fill out a DS 3235 application form on the DMV website and submit the required documents accordingly. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:14, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::{{tq|I'm wondering why this discrepancy exists in the replacement process.}}
:The [[Real ID Act]] contributed to the discrepancy in the replacment process, as did several notable fake ID rings on both coasts.[https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-lockyer-announces-arrest-mastermind-national-fake-id-operation][https://www.nj.com/news/2011/12/six_motor_vehicle_commission_c.html] In other words, "this is why we can't have nice things". [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 21:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
::{{small|We can't have nice things because those in power regulate the allocation of goods. To distinguish between the deserving and undeserving they need people to have IDs. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 10:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}}

= December 27 =

== Building containing candle cabinets ==

Is there a term (in pretty much any language) for a separate building next to a church, containing candle cabinets where people place votive candles? I've seen this mostly in Romania (and in at least one church in Catalonia), but suspect it is more widespread. (I've also seen just candle cabinets with no separate building, but I'm guessing that there is no term for that.) - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] &#124; [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 01:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:[[Shrine]] ''might'' cover it, but I suspect there's a more specific term in at least one language. {The poster fornerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 21:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
::Somebody contributed a couple of photos of these kind of cabinets to commons. [[:File:Orthodoxe_Nonne_putzt_Kerzen%C3%B6fchen.JPG]] and [[:File:Beh%C3%A4lter_f%C3%BCr_Opferkerzen_an_einer_orthodoxen_Kirche_in_Rum%C3%A4nien.JPG]]. Both are in Romania, and outdoor. I suppose the purpose of the cabinet is to protect the candles from the weather? I see pictures of indoor ''racks'' for candles. One example is [[:File:Religión en Isla Margarita, Valle del Espíritu Santo.jpg]] which is an upcoming Commons picture of the day. This small dark metal shed full of dripping wax is apparently located in or near to the rather pretty and well-lit [[Basilica of Our Lady of El Valle]], but I saw nothing to tell me the spatial relationship. Some discussion, again about Romanian Eastern Orthodox traditions, [https://www.flickr.com/photos/time-to-look/27689850307 in this Flickr photo's text], which calls them ... candle cabinets. (They protect the candles from wind and rain, and protect the church from the candles.) [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 11:11, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
::: {{ping|Card Zero}} the things you are posting are, precisely, candle cabinets. What I'm talking about are structures like a proper building, but with just a portal, no doors as such. Here's a rare non-Romanian example I photographed in 2001: [[:File:Montserrat - prayer candles.jpg]]. Remarkably, I don't see any Romanian examples that really show the structure, they are all too close-in detailed. I'll try to see if I can find an example I may have shot but not yet uploaded. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] &#124; [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 04:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

= December 28 =

== Truncated Indian map in Wikipedia ==

Why is the map of India always appears truncated in all of Wikipedia pages, when there is no official annexing of Indian territories in Kashmir, by Pakistan and China nor its confirmation from Indian govt ? With Pakistan and China just claiming the territory, why the world map shows it as annexed by them, separating from India ? [[User:TravelLover05|TravelLover05]] ([[User talk:TravelLover05|talk]]) 15:05, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

:The map at [[India]] shows Kashmir in light green, meaning "claimed but not controlled". It's not truncated, it's ''differently included.'' [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 17:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
:Please see no 6 in [[Talk:India/FAQ]] [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 20:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

= December 29 =

== Set animal's name = sha? ==

"In ancient Egyptian art, the Set animal, or sha,[citation needed]" - this seems like a major citation needed. Any help?
[[User:Temerarius|Temerarius]] ([[User talk:Temerarius|talk]]) 00:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:Which article does that appear in? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 01:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
::It must be [[Set animal#:~:text=The sha is usually depicted,erect, are usually depicted as|this]] article. [[User:Omidinist|Omidinist]] ([[User talk:Omidinist|talk]]) 04:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:::That term was in the original version of the article, written 15 years ago by an editor named "P Aculeius" who is still active. Maybe the OP could ask that user about it? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 05:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:*{{tq|Each time, the word ''šꜣ'' is written over the Seth-animal.}}<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=0po3AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA21&dq=%22Each+time+,+the+word+š3+is+written+over+the+Seth-animal.%22&hl=en]</sup>
:*{{tq|Sometimes the animal is designated as sha (''šꜣ'') , but we are not certain at all whether this designation was its name.}}<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=yNn7EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA68&dq=%22Sometimes+the+animal+is+designated+as+sha+(š)+,+but+we+are+not+certain+at+all+whether+this+designation+was+its+name.%22&hl=en]</sup>
:*{{tq|When referring to the ancient Egyptian terminology, the so-called sha-animal, as depicted and mentioned in the Middle Kingdom tombs of Beni Hasan, together with other fantastic creatures of the desert and including the griffin, closely resembles the Seth animal.}}<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=PRjOEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA483&dq=%22When+referring+to+the+ancient+Egyptian+ter-minology,+the+so-called+sha-animal,+as+depicted+and+mentioned+in+the+Middle+Kingdom+tombs+of+Beni+Hasan,+together+with+other+fantastic+creatures+of+the+des-ert+and+including+the+griffin,+closely+resembles+the+Seth+animal.%22&hl=en]</sup>
:*{{tq|''šꜣ'' ‘Seth-animal’}}<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=EwE2DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA81&dq=%22š+'Seth-animal'%22&hl=en]</sup>
:*{{tq|He claims that the domestic pig is called “sha,” the name of the Set-animal.}}<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=kc0UAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA141&dq=%22He+claims+that+the+domestic+pig+is+called+sha,+the+name+of+the+Set-animal.%22%22&hl=en]</sup>
:Wiktionary gives ''[[wikt:šꜣ#Noun 2|šꜣ]]'' as meaning "<u>wild</u> pig", not mentioning use in connection with depictions of the Seth-animal. The hieroglyphs shown for ''šꜣ'' do not resemble those in the article [[Set animal]], which instead are listed as ideograms in (or for) ''[[wikt:stẖ#Egyptian|stẖ]]'', the proper noun ''Seth''. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 08:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you! The reason I brought it up was because the hieroglyph for the set animal didn't have the sound value to match in jsesh.
::[[User:Temerarius|Temerarius]] ([[User talk:Temerarius|talk]]) 22:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
{{Hiero|The word ''sha'' (accompanying<br>depictions of the Set animal)|<hiero>SA-A-E12.E12</hiero>|align=right|era=egypt}}
:::IMO they should be removed, or, if this can be sourced, be replaced by one or more of the following two: &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 09:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
{{clear}}
{{multiple image
| width = 125
| image1 = Sha (animal).jpg
| alt1 =
| image2 = Set animal.svg
| alt2 =
| footer = Budge's original drawing and second version of PharaohCrab's drawing; the original looked very different, and this one is clearly based on Budge's as traced by me in 2009, but without attribution.
}}
:The article—originally "Sha (animal)" was one of the first I wrote, or attempted to write, and was based on and built on the identification by [[E. A. Wallis Budge]], in [https://books.google.com/books?id=b9ZDAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Budge,+Gods+of+the+Egyptians&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjxwteh7dmKAxUf48kDHeLjINYQ6AF6BAgGEAI#v=onepage&q=Sha&f=false ''The Gods of the Egyptians''], which uses the hieroglyph <hiero>M8</hiero> for the word "sha", and includes the illustration that I traced from a scan and uploaded to Commons (and which was included in the article from the time of its creation in 2009 until December 21, 2024 when [[User:PharaohCrab]] replaced it with his original version of the one shown above; see its history for what it looked like until yesterday). I have had very little to do with the article since [[User:Sonjaaa]] made substantial changes and moved it to "Seth animal" in 2010; although it's stayed on my watchlist, I long since stopped trying to interfere with it, as it seemed to me that other editors were determined to change it to the way they thought it should be, and I wasn't sophisticated enough to intervene or advocate effectively for my opinions. In fact the only edit by me I can see after that was fixing a typo.

:As for the word ''sha'', that is what Budge called it, based on the hieroglyph associated with it; I was writing about this specific creature, which according to Budge and some of the other sources quoted above has some degree of independence from Set, as it sometimes appears without him and is used as the determinative of one or two other deities, whose totemic animal it might also have been. One of the other scholars quoted above questions whether the word ''sha'' is the name of the animal, but still associates the word with the animal: Herman Te Velde's article, "Egyptian Hieroglyphs as Signs Symbols and Gods", quoted above, uses slightly modified versions of Budge's illustrations; his book ''Seth, God of Confusion'' is also quoted above, both with the transliteration ''šꜣ'', which in "Egyptian Hieroglyphs" he also renders ''sha''. [[Percy Newberry]] is the source cited by the [[Henry Francis Herbert Thompson|Henry Thompson]] quotation above, claiming that ''sha'' referred to a domestic pig as well as the Set animal, and a different god distinct from Set, though sharing the same attributes (claims of which Thompson seems skeptical). Herman Te Velde also cites Newberry, though he offers a different explanation for the meaning of "sha" as "destiny". ''All Things Ancient Egypt'', also quoted above, calls the animal "the so-called ''sha''-animal", while ''Classification from Antiquity to Modern Times'' just uses ''šꜣ'' and "Seth-animal".

:I'm not certain what the question here is; that the hieroglyph transliterated ''sha'' is somehow associated with the creature seems to have a clear scholarly consensus; most of the scholars use it as the name of the creature; Herman Te Velde is the only one who suggests that it ''might'' not be its name, though he doesn't conclude whether it is or isn't; and one general source says in passing "so-called ''sha''-animal", which accepts that this is what it's typically referred to in scholarship, without endorsing it. Although Newberry made the connection with pigs, none of the sources seems to write the name with pig hieroglyphs as depicted above. Could you be clearer about what it is that's being discussed here? [[User:P Aculeius|P Aculeius]] ([[User talk:P Aculeius|talk]]) 16:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

:[[File:Budgesh.png|thumb|things that start with sh]]
:I asked because I couldn't find it in Gardiner (jsesh, no match when searching by sound value) or Budge (dictionary vol II.)
:[[User:Temerarius|Temerarius]] ([[User talk:Temerarius|talk]]) 05:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

= December 30 =

== I do not say the Frenchman will not come. I only say he will not come by sea. ==

1. What is the ultimate source of this famous 1803 quote by John Jervis (1735 – 1823), 1st Earl of St Vincent, First Lord of the Admiralty at the time. I googled Books and no source is ever given except possibly another collection of quotations. The closest I got was: "At a parley in London while First Lord of the Admiralty 1803". That's just not good enough. Surely there must be someone who put this anecdote in writing for the first time.

2. Wouldn't you say this use of the simple present in English is not longer current in contemporary English, and that the modern equivalent would use present continuous forms "I'm not saying... I'm only saying..." (unless Lord Jervis meant to say he was in the habit of saying this; incidentally I do realize this should go to the Language Desk but I hope it's ok just this once)

[[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 11:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:Assuming he's talking about England, does he propose building a bridge over the Channel? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 12:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::How about a [[Channel_Tunnel#Earlier_proposals|tunnel]]? --[[User:Wrongfilter|Wrongfilter]] ([[User talk:Wrongfilter|talk]]) 12:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:::It's a joke. He's saying that the French won't invade under any circumstances (see [[English understatement]]). [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 20:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:::The First Lord of the Admiralty wouldn't be the one stopping them if the French came by tunnel (proposed in 1802) or air (the French did have hot air balloons). Any decent military officer would understand that an invasion by tunnel or balloon would have no chance of success, but this fear caused some English opposition against the Channel Tunnel for the next 150 years. Just hinting at the possibility of invasion by tunnel amongst military officers would be considered a joke.
:::Unless he was insulting the British Army (no, now I'm joking). [[User:PiusImpavidus|PiusImpavidus]] ([[User talk:PiusImpavidus|talk]]) 10:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

:The quoted wording varies somewhat. Our article [[John Jervis, 1st Earl of St Vincent]] has it as "I do not say, my Lords, that the French will not come. I say only they will not come by sea" in an 1801 letter to the Board of Admiralty, cited to {{cite book | last = Andidora | first = Ronald | title = Iron Admirals: Naval Leadership in the Twentieth Century | publisher = Greenwood Publishing Group | year = 2000 | isbn = 978-0-313-31266-3 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=0P-A8rIfO34C&pg=PA3 | page = 3}}. Our article [[British anti-invasion preparations of 1803–05]] has Jervis telling the House of Lords "I do not say the French cannot come, I only say they cannot come by sea", and then immediately, and without citation, saying it was more probably [[George Elphinstone, 1st Viscount Keith|Keith]]. I can't say I've ever seen it attributed to Keith anywhere else. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 13:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hmm, Andidora does '''not''' in fact say it was in a letter to the Board of Admiralty, nor does he explicitly say 1801. And his source, ''The Age of Nelson'' by G J Marcus has it as Jervis telling the House of Lords sometime during the scare of '03-'05. Marcus doesn't give a source. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 13:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::[[Robert Southey]] was [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LcGoSGtr84IC&pg=PA12#v=onepage&q&f=false attributing it to Lord St Vincent] as early as 1806, and while I don't want to put too much weight on his phrase "used to say" it does at any rate raise the possibility that St Vincent said (or wrote) it more than once. Perhaps Marcus and our St Vincent article are both right. --[[User:Antiquary|Antiquary]] ([[User talk:Antiquary|talk]]) 16:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Interesting. Thanks. Some modern accounts (not Southey apparently) claim Lord St Vincent was speaking in the House of Lords. If that was the case, wouldn't it be found in the parliamentary record? How far back does the parliamentary record go for the House of Commons and/or the House of Lords. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 17:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:As for (2), the tense is still alive and kicking, if I do say so myself. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 23:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::You don't say? [An idiom actually meaning "You say ''that'', do you?", although I dare say most of you know that.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 02:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:::This is not what I am asking. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 05:05, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Then I will answer you more directly. You are wrong: while the usage you quote is ''less common'' than it once was, it ''is'' still current, according to my experience as a native BrE speaker for over 65 years. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 13:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::I kid you not. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 23:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

== What percentage of Ancient Greek literature was preserved? ==

Has anyone seen an estimate of what percentage of Ancient Greek literature (broadly understood: literature proper, poetry, mathematics, philosophy, history, science, etc.) was preserved. It doesn't matter how you define "Ancient Greek literature", or if you mean the works available in 100 BC or 1 AD or 100 AD or 200 AD... Works were lost even in antiquity. I'm just trying to get a rough idea and was wondering if anyone ever tried to work out an estimate. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 17:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

:I don't have an answer handy for you at the moment, but I can tell you that people ''have'' tried to work out an estimate for this, at least from the perspective of "how many manuscripts containing such literature managed to survive past the early Middle Ages". We've worked this one out, with many caveats, by comparing library catalogues from very early monasteries to known survivals and estimating the loss rate. -- [[User:Asilvering|asilvering]] ([[User talk:Asilvering|talk]]) 20:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:One estimate is (less than) [https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/11/16/the-invisible-library] one percent. --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 20:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

:We have a [[Lost literary work]] article with a large "Antiquity" section. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 21:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::These are works known to have existed, because they were mentioned and sometimes even quoted in works that have survived. These known lost works are probably only a small fraction of all that have been lost. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 23:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:Few things which might be helpful:
:#{{xt|So profuse was Galen's output that the surviving texts represent nearly half of all the extant literature from ancient Greece.}}<ref>[[Galen|Galen's article]]</ref>
:#Although not just Greek, but only 1% of ancient literature survives.<ref>https://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/2009/10/26/reference-for-the-claim-that-only-1-of-ancient-literature-survives/</ref> --{{User:ExclusiveEditor/Signature}} 11:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

:The following quantities are known: <math>S,</math> the number of preserved works, <math>L,</math> the (unknown) number of lost works, and <math>M_L,</math> the number of lost works of which we know, through mentions in preserved works. In a (very) naive model, let <math>\mu</math> stand for the probability that a given work (lost or preserved) is mentioned in some other preserved work (so <math>M_L=\mu L</math>). The expected number of mentions of preserved works in other preserved works is then <math>M_S=\mu(S-1).</math> If we have the numerical value of the latter quantity (which is theoretically obtainable by scanning all preserved works), we can obtain an estimate for <math>\mu</math> and compute <math>L\approx\frac{M_L}{M_S}(S-1).</math>
:&nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

* Even without seeing any professional estimate of the kind I'm asking about here, my ballpark figure was that it had to be less than 1 percent, simply from noting how little of even the most celebrated and important authors has been preserved (e.g. about 5 percent for Sophocles) and how there are hundreds of authors and hundreds of works for which we only have the titles and maybe a few quotes, not to mention all those works of which we have not an inkling, the number of which it is, for this very reason, extremely hard to estimate.

* But as a corollary to my first question I have another three:

* 1. Has any modern historian tackled this paradox, namely the enormous influence that the culture of the Ancient World has had on the West while at the same time how little we actually know about that culture, and as a consequence the problem that we seem to believe that we know much more than we actually do? in other words that our image of it that has had this influence on Western culture might be to some extent a modern creation and might be very different of what it actually was?

* 2. I understand that in this regard there can be the opposite opinion (or we can call it a hypothesis, or an article of faith) which is the one that is commonly held (at least implicitly): that despite all that was lost the main features of our knowledge of the culture of the Ancient World are secure and that no lost work is likely to have modified the fundamentals? Like I said this seems to be the position that is commonly implicitly held, but I'm interested to hear if any historian has discussed this question and defended this position explicitly in a principled way?

* 3. Finally to what extent is the position mentioned in point 2 simply a result of ignorance (people not being aware of how much was lost)? How widespread is (in the West) the knowledge of how much was lost? How has that awareness developed in the West, both at the level of the experts and that of the culture in general, since say the 15th century? Have you encountered any discussions of these points?

[[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 08:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

:The issues touched upon are major topics in [[historiography]] as well as the [[philosophy of history]], not only for the Ancient (Classical) World but for all historical study. Traditionally, [[historian]]s have concentrated on the culture of the high and mighty. The imprint on the historical record by ''[[hoi polloi]]'' is much more difficult to detect, except in the rare instances where they rose up, so what we think of as "the" culture of any society is that of a happy few. Note also that "the culture of the Ancient World" covers a period of more than ten centuries, in which kingdoms and empires rose and fell, states and colonies were founded and conquered, in an endless successions of wars and intrigues. On almost any philosophical issue imaginable, including [[natural philosophy]], ancient philosophers have held contrary views. It is not clear how to define "the" culture of the Ancient World, and neither is it clear how to define the degree to which this culture has influenced modern Western society. It may be argued that the influence of say Plato or Sophocles has largely remained confined to an upper crust. I think historians studying this are well aware of the limitations of their source material, including the fact that history is written by the victors. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

:178.51.7.23 -- Think of it this way: What did it mean to "publish" something in the ancient world? You had at least one written manuscript of your work -- rarely more than a handful of such manuscripts. You could show what you had written to your friends, have it delivered to influential people, bequeath it to your heirs, or donate it to an archive or research collection (almost none of which were meaningfully public libraries in the modern sense of that phrase). However you chose to do it, once you were gone, the perpetuation of your work depended on other people having enough interest in it to do the laborious work of copying the manuscript, or being willing to pay to have a copy made. Works of literature which did not interest other people enough to copy manuscripts of it were almost always eventually lost, which ensured that a lot of tedious and worthless stuff was filtered out. Of course, pagan literary connoisseurs, Christian monks, Syriac and Arabic translators seeking Greek knowledge, and Renaissance Humanists all had different ideas of what was worth preserving, but between them, they ensured that a lot of interesting or engaging or informative works ended up surviving from ancient times. I'm sure that a number of worthy books still slipped through the gaps, but some losses were very natural and to be expected; for example, some linguists really wish that Claudius's book on the Etruscan language had survived, but it's not surprising that it didn't, since it would not have generally interested ancient, medieval, or renaissance literate people in the same way it would interest modern scholars struggling with Etruscan inscriptions.
:By the way, college bookstores on or near campuses of universities which had a Classics program sometimes used to have a small section devoted to the small green-backed (Greek) and red-backed (Latin) volumes of the [[Loeb Classical Library]], and you could get an idea of what survived from ancient times (and isn't very obscure or fragmentary) by perusing the shelves... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 01:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::Indeed - at the other end of the scale, the ''[[Description of Greece]]'' by Pausanias seems to have survived into the Middle Ages in a single MS (now of course lost), and there are no ancient references to either it or him known. Since the Renaissance it has been continuously in print. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 03:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}

= December 31 =

== Was the fictional character "The Jackal" (as played by Edward Fox and Bruce Willis) based on Carlos The Jackal? ==

Talking about the fictional assassin from the books and films. I once read somewhere that the real Carlos The Jackal didn't like being compared to the fictional character, because he said he was a professional Marxist revolutionary, not merely a hitman for hire to the highest bidder (not in the article about him at the moment, so maybe not true). [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 02:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

:No, the character wasn't based on Carlos. The films are based on the 1971 historical fiction novel ''[[The Day of the Jackal]]'' by Frederick Forsyth, which begins with a fairly accurate account of the actual 1962 assassination attempt on Charles de Gaulle by the French Air Force lieutenant colonel [[Jean Bastien-Thiry]], which failed. Subsequently in the fictional plot the terrorists hire an unnamed English professional hitman whom they give the codename 'The Jackal'.
:[[Carlos the Jackal]] was a Venezuelan terrorist named Ilich Ramírez Sánchez operating in the 1970s and '80s. He was given the cover name 'Carlos' when in 1971 he joined the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. When authorities found some of his weapons stashed in a friend's house, a copy of Forsyth's novel was noticed on his friend's bookshelf, and a ''Guardian'' journalist then invented the nickname, as journalists are wont to do. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 03:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::There's also the fictionalised Ilich Ramírez Sánchez / Carlos the Jackal from the [[Jason Bourne]] novels. [[User:PiusImpavidus|PiusImpavidus]] ([[User talk:PiusImpavidus|talk]]) 10:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

== References ==

I am on to creating an article on {{ill|Lu Chun|zh|陸淳}} soon. If anyone has got references about him other than those on google, it would be great if you could share them here. Thanks, {{User:ExclusiveEditor/Signature}} 11:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

:Did you try the [[National Central Library]] of Taiwan? The library has a lot of collection about history of Tang dynasty. If you want to write a research paper for publication purpose, you need to know what have been written by others. Then the [https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/ National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertation in Taiwan] under the central library can be a good starting point. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

== Battle of the Granicus ==

This month [https://archaeologymag.com/2024/12/location-of-alexander-the-greats-battlefield/ some news broke] about identification of the Battle of the Granicus site, stating in particular: "Professor Reyhan Korpe, a historian from Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University (ÇOMÜ) and Scientific Advisor to the “Alexander the Great Cultural Route” project, led the team that uncovered the battlefield". However, per [[Battle of the Granicus#Location]] it seems that the exact site has been known since at least [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-hellenic-studies/article/abs/battle-of-the-granicus-river/1C19CEF8F59308BED47331BE7063BB2C Hammond's 1980 article]. Am I reading the news correctly that what Korpe's team actually did was mapping Alexander’s journey to the Granicus rather than identifying the battle site per se? Per news, "Starting from Özbek village, Alexander’s army moved through Umurbey and Lapseki before descending into the Biga Plain". [[User:Brandmeister|Brandmeister]]<sup>[[User talk:Brandmeister|talk]]</sup> 23:38, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

:If Körpe and his team wrote a paper about their discovery, I haven't found it, so I can only go by news articles reporting on their findings. Apparently, Körpe gave a presentation at the Çanakkale Provincial Directorate of Culture and Tourism for an audience of local mayors and district governors,<sup>[https://www.dailysabah.com/turkiye/site-for-alexander-the-greats-battle-of-granicus-identified-in-northwest-turkiye/news]</sup> and I think the news reports reflect what he said there. Obviously, the presentation was in Turkish. Turkish news sources, based on an item provided by [[Demirören News Agency|DHA]], quote him as saying, "{{tq|Bölgede yaptığımız araştırmalarda antik kaynakları da çok dikkatli okuyarak, yorumlayarak savaşın <u>aşağı yukarı</u> tam olarak nerede olduğunu, hangi köyler arasında olduğunu, ovanın tam olarak neresinde olduğunu bulduk.}}" [My underlining] Google Translate turns this into, "During our research in the region, by reading and interpreting ancient sources very carefully, we found out <u>more or less</u> exactly where the war took place, which villages it took place between, and where exactly on the plain it took place." I cannot reconcile "more or less" with "exactly".
:The news reports do not reveal the location identified by Körpe, who is certainly aware of Hammond's theory, since he cited the latter's 1980 article in earlier publications. One possibility is that the claim will turn out to have been able to confirm Hammond's theory definitively. Another possibility is that the location they identified is not "more or less exactly" the same as that of Hammond's theory. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 02:08, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

= January 1 =

== Has there ever been an incident of a serial killer murdering another serial killer? ==

Question as topic. Has this ever happened outside of the movies? [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 05:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

:This is an interesting question. Just because you can't find any incident, doesn't mean this kind of case never happened (type II error). [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

:Apparently yes: [[Dean Corll]] was killed by one of his his accomplices, [[Elmer Wayne Henley]]. --[[User:Antiquary|Antiquary]] ([[User talk:Antiquary|talk]]) 12:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

::Of course it would be more notable if the two were not connected to each other. --[[Special:Contributions/142.112.149.206|142.112.149.206]] ([[User talk:142.112.149.206|talk]]) 08:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

:If you're including underworld figures, this happens not infrequently. As an Aussie, a case that springs to mind was [[Andrew Veniamin]] murdering [[Victor Pierce]]. Both underworld serial murderers. I'm sure there are many similar cases in organised crime. [[User:Eliyohub|Eliyohub]] ([[User talk:Eliyohub|talk]]) 08:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::Aren't hired killers distinct from the usual concept of a serial killer? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 09:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

:Outside the movies? Sure, on [[Dexter (TV series)|TV]]. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 21:09, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:The Dexter character from the multiple Dexter series is based on [[Pedro Rodrigues Filho]], who killed criminals, including murderers. It is necessary to decide how many merders each of those murders did in order to decide if you would want to classify them as serial killers or just general murderers. [[Special:Contributions/68.187.174.155|68.187.174.155]] ([[User talk:68.187.174.155|talk]]) 19:04, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::It sounds like the ''[[Death Wish (1974 film)]]'' film series might have also drawn inspiration from Filho. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 03:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

== Another serial killer question ==

about 20 years ago, I saw a documentary where it was said that the majority of serial killers kill for sexual gratification, or for some sort of revenge against their upbringing, or because in their head that God (or someone else) told them to kill. But the FBI agent on the documentary said something about how their worst nightmare was an extremely intelligent, methodical killer who was doing what he did to make some sort of grand statement about society/political statement. That this sort of killer was one step ahead of law enforcement and knew all of their methods. Like a Hannibal Lecter type individual. He said that he could count on the fingers of one hand the sort of person who he was talking about, but that these killers were the most difficult of all to catch and by far the most dangerous. Can you tell me any examples of these killers? [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 05:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:[[Ted Kaczynski]] ("the Unabomber") comes to mind. --[[Special:Contributions/142.112.149.206|142.112.149.206]] ([[User talk:142.112.149.206|talk]]) 07:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
::I second this. Ted the Unabomber only got finally caught by chance, only after his brother happened to recognise him. [[User:Eliyohub|Eliyohub]] ([[User talk:Eliyohub|talk]]) 08:43, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:More than a few killed for money; [[Michael Swango]] apparently just for joy. The case of [[Leopold and Loeb]] comes to mind, who hoped to demonstrate superior intellect; if they had not bungled their first killing despite spending seven months planning everything, more would surely have followed. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 15:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:[[Joseph Paul Franklin]]. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 13:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

== Missing fire of London ==

[[British Movietone News]] covered the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOIsenLDU9o burning down of the Crystal Palace] in this somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but apparently factual, film. At 00:15 it refers to 'the biggest London blaze since 1892'. What happened in 1892 that could be considered comparable to the Palace's demise, or at least sufficiently well-known to be referred to without further explanation?

I can see nothing in [[History of London]], [[List of town and city fires]], [[List of fires]] or [[1892]]. The [https://londonfirejournal.blogspot.com/2007/05/welcome.html London Fire Journal] records "May 8, 1892 - Scott's Oyster Bar, Coventry Street. 4 dead.", but also lists later fires with larger death tolls. Does anyone have access to the Journal of the [[Royal Statistical Society]]'s article [https://academic.oup.com/jrsssa/article-abstract/56/1/124/7090013 ''Fires in London and the Metropolitan Fire Brigade in 1892'']? <span class="nowrap">[[User:Verbarson|--&nbsp;Verbarson&nbsp;]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Verbarson|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Verbarson|edits]]</sub></span> 13:48, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

:I see the [[Great Fire of 1892]] destroyed half the capital of Newfoundland and Labrador. But comparing that to [[The_Crystal_Palace#Destruction_by_fire|the Crystal Palace fire]], which destroyed only the Crystal Palace, is an odd choice. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 14:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
::It would also be odd to call it a "London blaze". &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 15:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

:::The closest I found was the [[1861 Tooley Street fire]]. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 16:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Also a large fire at Wood Street in the City in 1882 (perhaps later mistaken for 1892?). [https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/13518096] [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 16:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::I too wonder whether the Movietone newsreader was the victim of a typo. In December ''1897'' [[Cripplegate]] suffered "the greatest fire...that has occurred in the City since the Great Fire of 1666". [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gJ7uvG29enQC&pg=PA91&dq=%221897+-+an+inquiry+respecting+the+greatest+fire+(+that+in+Cripplegate+)+that+has+occurred+in+the+City%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiOwqqy-daKAxUHXEEAHeoYKXAQ6AF6BAgGEAI#v=onepage&q=%221897%20-%20an%20inquiry%20respecting%20the%20greatest%20fire%20(%20that%20in%20Cripplegate%20)%20that%20has%20occurred%20in%20the%20City%22&f=false]. --[[User:Antiquary|Antiquary]] ([[User talk:Antiquary|talk]]) 11:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC) That's also mentioned, I now see, in Verbarson's London Fire Journal link. --[[User:Antiquary|Antiquary]] ([[User talk:Antiquary|talk]]) 12:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

:{{re|Verbarson}} ''Fires in London and the Metropolitan Fire Brigade in 1892'' is available on JSTOR as part of the Wikipedia Library. It doesn't give details of any individual fires. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 16:51, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
::{{Re|DuncanHill}}, so it is. The DOI link in that article is broken; I should have been more persistent with the JSTOR search. Thank you. <span class="nowrap">[[User:Verbarson|--&nbsp;Verbarson&nbsp;]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Verbarson|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Verbarson|edits]]</sub></span> 17:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:Unexpectedly, from the ''Portland Guardian'' (that's [[Portland, Victoria]]): [https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/65441175 GREAT FIRE IN LIONDON. A great fire is raging in the heart of the London ducks.] Dated 26 November 1892. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 07:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::Oh, the poor ducks. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 12:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::<small>The whole OCR transcript of that blurred newspaper column is hilarious. "The fames have obtained a firm bold", indeed! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.6.84.253|94.6.84.253]] ([[User talk:94.6.84.253|talk]]) 12:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)</small>
::Setting aside the unsung history of the passionate ducks of London, what I see in that clipping is:
::* 1892 - Australia is still a colony (18+ years to go)
::* which is linked to the UK by (i) long-distance shipping, and (ii) [[Submarine communications cable#Cable to India, Singapore, East Asia and Australia|telegraph cables]]
::* because of (i), the London docks are economically important
::* because of (ii), they get daily updates from London
::Therefore, the state of the London docks (and the possible fate of the Australian ships there) is of greater importance to Australian merchants than it is to most Londoners. So headlines in Portland may not reflect the lesser priority of that news in the UK? <span class="nowrap">[[User:Verbarson|--&nbsp;Verbarson&nbsp;]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Verbarson|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Verbarson|edits]]</sub></span> 17:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Yes, I was highly impressed by the rapidity of the Victorian Victorian telegraph system there. But my money's on Antiquary's theory, above - I think the newsreel announcer's script had 1892 as a typo for 1897. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 18:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Which I have finally found (in WP) at [[Timeline of London (19th century)#1890 to 1899]] (using the same cite as Antiquary). It does look persuasively big ("The Greatest Fire of Modern Times" - [[The Star (1888–1960)|''Star'']]), though there were no fatalities. Despite that, an inquest was held. It sounds much more likely than the docks fire to have been memorable in 1936. <span class="nowrap">[[User:Verbarson|--&nbsp;Verbarson&nbsp;]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Verbarson|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Verbarson|edits]]</sub></span> 19:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC)


= December 25 =


== Count Ciano ==
= January 4 =


== Could the Sack of [[Jericho]] be almost ==
In my country (Serbia) there is a saying "like Count Ciano" when you are describing someone whos living a very rich and extravagant lifestyle. Its a very old saying, used mostly by older people and I tried to find its roots but I couldnt, because [[Galeazzo Ciano|count Ciano]] seemed to have led a normal life. I've find out on the internet that he visited Serbia (then Kingdom of Yugoslavia) many times before the war, so I understand why this saying stuck, but I dont understand why was he considered special so that people used him as an example? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/77.243.16.208|77.243.16.208]] ([[User talk:77.243.16.208|talk]]) 01:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:My impression, seconded by our article, is that Galeazzo Ciani led a "high-profile glamorous life" until his dramatic fall from grace and execution. I'd never describe his as a "normal" life! - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 04:32, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


historical in the sense that the story of what happened, happened to a different city but was transferred to Jericho?[[User:Richard L. Peterson|Rich]] ([[User talk:Richard L. Peterson|talk]]) 05:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
== Arguments against 'religion provides support' or 'religion provides a sense of community' ==
:It might be. But then again, it might not be. Following whatever links there are to the subject within the article might be a good start for finding out about whatever theories there might be. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 07:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:To believe that the events in the story are historical, whether for Jericho or another city, amounts to believing in a miracle. Barring miracles, no amount of horn-blowing and shouting can bring defensive walls down.
:Jericho was destroyed in the 16th century BCE. The first version of the [[Book of Joshua]] was written in the late 7th century BCE, so there are 9 centuries between the destruction and the recording of the story. An orally transmitted account, passed on through some thirty generations, might have undergone considerable changes, turning a conquest with conventional war practices, possibly with sound effects meant to install fear in the besieged, into a miraculous event. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 10:50, 4 January 2025 (UTC)


:[Edit Conflicts] The sack was described in the [[Book of Joshua]], which however was likely compiled around 640–540 BCE, some six or seven centuries after the supposed Hebrew conquest of Canaan. Some scholars now discount the whole Exodus and Conquest narrative as political lobbying written by [[Babylonian captivity|Jewish exiles in Babylonia]] (which the Persians later took over) hoping to be given control over the former territory of Israel as well as being restored to their native Judah.
I am interested as to whether anyone can direct me to (or provide me with) counterarguments to the above oft-stated dictums along the lines of 'religion is a force for good because it helps support people through difficult times' or 'religion is a force for good because it provides a beneficial community in which to live, help one another, etc'. Personally I am extremely strongly on the side of Hitchens, Dawkins, Grayling etc., but satisfactory counterarguments for these two suggestions (or perhaps one suggestion, if you see them as the same thing) have so far eluded me, and I am reluctant to maintain an extremely strong opinion that the world would be better off without religion when I can not refute these arguments. Could anyone provide me with or direct me to some thoughts to this end? I am aware that perhaps there simply is no good counterargument, but I would certainly like to see the best efforts generally heard in these debates.
:The narrative logically explains why a people once 'Egyptian slaves' (like all subjects of the Pharoah) were later free in Canaan, but by then it was likely forgotten that Egypt once controlled almost the entirety of Canaan, from which it withdrew in the [[Late Bronze Age collapse|Late Bronze Age Collapse]]. The Hebrew peoples of the (always separate) states of Israel and Judah emerged from Canaanite culture ''in situ'', though minor folk movements (for example, of the [[Tribe of Levi]], who often had Egyptian names) may have had a role. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.6.84.253|94.6.84.253]] ([[User talk:94.6.84.253|talk]]) 10:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I heard the sack of Jericho in book of Joshua was an explanatory myth, not some kind of Exile claim to ownership, which is more logical anyway. If there were a more recent city that was sacked, it would be less than the estimate of 30 geneations of remembrance. I did forget to stress that when I asked if the story could be almost historical that I wasn't suggesting that Jericho's walls were supernaturally destroyed by trumpets. After all, the actual method of conquest in the story could be the connivance of the traitor Rahab.[[User:Richard L. Peterson|Rich]] ([[User talk:Richard L. Peterson|talk]]) 02:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Oh, certainly the myth likely existed before it was consolidated with others into the written documents, just as stories about the mythical [[Danel]] may have been adapted into the fictional [[Daniel (biblical figure)|Daniel]] of the supposedly contemporary [[Book of Daniel]] describing his exploits in the 6th century BCE court of [[Nebuchadnezzar II]], although scholars generally agree that this was actually written in the period 167–163 BCE. {The poster formerly knwn as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.6.84.253|94.6.84.253]] ([[User talk:94.6.84.253|talk]]) 07:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)


::The Israelites partly emerged ''in situ'' (though there was also a definite nomad/pastoralist component), especially along the West Bank hill-chain (running in an approximate north-south direction) where the [[Four-room house]] took hold among the rural inhabitants there. They were not originally city-dwellers, and their culture could not have been consolidated until the power of the Canaanite cities in that area had declined, and it's not too hard to believe that they sometimes moved against what cities remained, so that part of the conquest narrative is not necessarily a pure myth. Jericho was in the valley (not along the hill-chain), so was not part of the core settled rural agricultural four-room house area, but was inhabited more by pastoralists/animal-herders who became affiliated... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 21:19, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
If possible, I am more interested in seeing arguments posited which are '''not''' of the form "Well that's true, but still - look at all the bad things that religion does" (i.e. counterarguments against religion as a whole, which have no specific reference to the above alleged benefits of religion): I suspect I have seen them all and they do not counter the specific points which still cause me concern, merely religion as a whole. However, I accept that there may not be many such arguments. Either way, many thanks for your help! [[User:Mathmos6|Mathmos6]] ([[User talk:Mathmos6|talk]]) 03:25, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
:You could argue against the [[Strict_conditional|conditional]]: if something helps support people through difficult times, then it is a force for good. Or against the conditional: if something provides a beneficial community in which to live, then it is a force for good. To do so would probably mean taking up a [[Relativism|relativist]] position regarding morality.
:You could also argue that religion in fact doesn't support people through difficult times, or doesn't provide a beneficial community in which to live.
:You could also accept that perhaps these arguments are valid: that religion does have aspects that are "good". I assume your arguments against a belief in religion don't hinge on it being completely and 100% bad. [[User_talk:Sanchom|Sancho]] 05:37, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


==Accessibility, for URLs in text document==
:I'd say that, while religion fosters a sense of community for those within the religion, that it alienates those outside the religion. This is similar to how it tends to reduce violence between individuals of that religion (or sect), while increasing violence between members of that religion (or sect) and others. <small>Which could lead to the conclusion that the best way to reduce violence everywhere is to kill off everyone of any religion other than your own. </small> [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 06:03, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
We've been asked to increase the accessibility of all documents we produce, esp. syllabi. I use WordPerfect, where I don't seem to be able to have a URL with a descriptive text in the way Word allows. 508 is the operative term. I'm trying this out: "Princeton University has some handy tips on what is called “active reading, on this webpage: https://mcgraw.princeton.edu/active-reading-strategies." In other words, descriptive text followed by a bare URL. Is that good for screen readers? {{U|Graham87}}, how does this look/sound to you? Thanks for your help, [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 18:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{replyto|Drmies}} I wouldn't make a general rule about that as it's context-dependent ... depending on how many URL's are in a document, reading them might get annoying. In general I'd prefer to read a link with descriptive text rather than a raw URL, because the latter aren't always very human-readable ... but I don't think this is really an accessibility issue; just do what would make sense for a sighted reader here. [[User:Graham87|Graham87]] ([[User talk:Graham87|talk]]) 00:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::[[User:Graham87|Graham87]], thanks. There's only one or two in a ten-page document. According to our bosses, this is an accessibility issue--but it seems to me as if someone sounded an alarm and now everyone who doesn't actually know much about the issue is telling us to comply with a set of directives which they haven't given us. Instead, we are directed to some self-help course that involves only Word. It's fun. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:Stop using WordPerfect and start using Word. --[[User:Viennese Waltz|Viennese Waltz]] 07:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::I don't know why, but it seems many legal professionals prefer WordPerfect. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 10:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::[[User:Viennese Waltz|Viennese Waltz]], thanks so much for that helpful suggestion. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 15:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:You can create a hyperlink to a file using WordPerfect. First, you select text or a graphic you want to create a hyperlink. Then you click “Tools”, select “Hyperlink” and then type a path or document you want to link to. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 10:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::[[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]], that sounds like it might work: thank you. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{small|Do web browsers display WordPerfect documents? I don't think I have a WordPerfect viewing app installed on my platform (macOS). Does anyone have a [[URL]] of a WordPerfect document handy? &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 14:56, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}}
::[[User:Lambiam]], WP translates easily to PDF and to Word. I use PDFs in my [[Learning management system|LMS]]. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::You can see why WordPerfect is popular in legal circles at [[WordPerfect#Key characteristics]] (fourth bullet point) and [[WordPerfect#Faithful customers]]. [[Special:Contributions/2A00:23A8:1:D801:8C31:BAC2:88CF:A92B|2A00:23A8:1:D801:8C31:BAC2:88CF:A92B]] ([[User talk:2A00:23A8:1:D801:8C31:BAC2:88CF:A92B|talk]]) 16:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I don't have the feeling this answers my question. Would I have to find and install an app that translates .wpd documents to .pdf or .doc documents? Would I then be able to tell my browser to use this app? The question is informative, not meant to bash a product that I have zero familiarity with. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 17:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::I've opened early WordPerfect (WP 5.1) documents using both Word and Firefox without any need for a third party translator. The only trick was changing the file extension to .WPD so that my computer could create the file association more easily. In the old days, file extensions were not so rigorously restrictive and many files ended up with extensions like .01 or .v4 or whatever. [[User:Matt Deres|Matt Deres]] ([[User talk:Matt Deres|talk]]) 17:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::I cannot check if it would work for me, for lack of access to any WordPerfect document of any age. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 21:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::[https://search.justice.gov/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&affiliate=justice-archive&query=wordperfect Here's a bunch of them, in the DOJ archives.] [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 00:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Thanks, finally an answer. When I click on a {{mono|.wpd}} link, the file is downloaded. I can then open and view it with [[LibreOffice]]. (I can also open it with [[Apache OpenOffice|OpenOffice]], but then I get to see garbage like ╖#<m\r╛∞¼_4YÖ¤ⁿVíüd╤Y.) &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 14:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::Yes, web browsers do display WordPerfect documents. If you google “wpd online viewer”, you will find a lot of them. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 23:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::When I google [https://www.google.com/search?q=%E2%80%9Cwpd+online+viewer%E2%80%9D&udm=14 [{{mono|“wpd online viewer”}}&#x5d;], I get two hits, one to this page and one to [https://fileproinfo.com/tools/viewer/wpd a site] where you can <u>upload</u> a WPD document in order to be able to view it online. What happens when you view an html page with something like {{mono|<nowiki><a href="file:///my-document.wpd">Looky here!</a></nowiki>}} embedded? &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Yes, you're right. Only Docx2doc (https://www.docx2doc.com/convert) and [[Jumpshare]] provide online viewers now. However, there are still other offline alternative, such as Cisdem (https://www.cisdem.com/document-reader-mac.html) and [[Apache OpenOffice|Apache]]. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Some other text editors, such as [[TextMaker]], can open and view WPD files. However, after editing, the WPD files can only be saved as other formats, such as docx or doc. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


One more thing that just came up--we got rapped on the fingers though the mandatory "training" didn't touch on it. We've been told that hyphens are bad. The internet tells me that screenreaders have trouble with hyphenated words, but does this apply also to date ranges? {{U|Graham87}}, does yours get this right, "Spring Break: 17-21 March"? For now I'm going with "Spring Break, 17 to 21 March", but it just doesn't look good to my traditional eyes. And on top of that I have to use sans serif fonts... [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 17:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::Mathmos: you're in a very hard place, because your argument runs across divergent cognitive styles. I'm not particularly religious myself, but I do recognize the power of religion for a certain style of thinking. Religion (on a lower level) adds a significant measure of stability and comfort to the lives of people who would otherwise be plagued by ideation that they are not able to understand and not prepared to accept. On a higher level, it gives people a kind of peace and appreciation for life that's difficult to find in the secular world. Yes, Marx was right when he said that religion is the opiate of the masses; Marx simply didn't appreciate the ''value'' of opiates.
*To give another example, I have to redo this: "Final grades are computed along the following scale: A: 90-100; B+: 87-89; B: 80-86; C+: 77-79; C: 70-76; D+: 67-69; D: 60-66; F: Below 60." [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 17:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 5 =
::To get to your specific point, though, the counter-argument to the 'Religion is a force for good…' arguments is to point out that religion is ''not'' unambiguously good. Religion is a 'comfort zone', and as with any comfort zone people who are pushed to the edge of it can act out in terribly unpleasant ways. I don't think I need to point out what these unpleasant ways are (everyone can think of examples, and pointing it out is overkill). However, that argument only goes so far: if you run across someone who understands the limits of that comfort zone and keeps him/herself centered in it, they will merely acknowledge that you are right and smile in (what you will interpret as) an infuriatingly indulgent way. Someone once quipped that religion appeals to the ignorant and to the wise, but those of us who are merely intelligent can't tell which is which. Dunno if that's true, but… {{=)}} --[[User_talk:Ludwigs2|<span style="color:darkblue;font-weight:bold">Ludwigs</span><span style="color:green;font-weight:bold">2</span>]] 06:52, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


== How to search for awkwardly named topics ==
:::I'd say that it's best to concede that religion does provide benefits (sense of community, etc) but argue that religion as such isn't necessary to get those benefits. For example, even an atheist could find value in a non-religious community group (like the [[Kiwanis]] or something similar). So argue that religion does provide certain benefits, but that you can get thoe benefits without adopting supernatural beliefs. [[User:Meelar|Meelar]] [[User talk:Meelar|(talk)]] 10:43, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


On and off I've been looking for good sources for the concepts of [[general union]] and [[trade union federation]] so as to improve the articles, but every time I try I only get one or two somewhat helpful results. Many of the results are not of material about the concepts of general union or trade union federations, but often about a ''specific'' instance of them, and as a result hard to gleen a lot from about the broader concept. Typcially this is because of issues such as many general unions being named as such (for example [[Transport & General Workers' Union]]). I'm aware of the search trick that'd be something like {{tq|"general union" -Transport & General Workers' Union}} but I've found it largely cumbersome and ineffective, often seeming to filter out any potential material all together
:If my memory serves me correctly, Dawkins covers this problem in ''[[The God Delusion]]''. (See [[The God Delusion#Religion and morality]].) Have you read that book? [[User:Mitch Ames|Mitch Ames]] ([[User talk:Mitch Ames|talk]]) 12:18, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


Thought I'd ask because I'd like to improve those articles, and this is an issue I'm sure would come up again for me otherwise on other articles [[User:Bejakyo|Bejakyo]] ([[User talk:Bejakyo|talk]]) 13:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:My standard answer is that if it's just a social good you're looking for, you can get that with a bowling club or a community service group. You don't need all the negative stuff or the nonsense for just that. And you can't just look at the positive social aspect without paying attention to whatever negatives might come from it. The mafia ran soup kitchens too. --[[User:Mr.98|Mr.98]] ([[User talk:Mr.98|talk]]) 15:57, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
::It's important to keep in mind that for a long time, religion was "all we had". There are so many options today that religion has lost its once-pervading importance. Just today, this USAToday article[http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-12-25/religion-god-atheism-so-what/52195274/1] points out that a large percentage of folks are apathetic to ''both'' conventional religion and to atheism (which, in itself, resembles a religion). ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 19:11, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


:Do any of the articles listed at [[Unionism]] help? [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 14:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::It only resembles a religion in the sense that it's a belief about God. Atheists don't have a common church, set of beliefs, priests, prophet, or holy book. You don't see atheists congregating every weekend to hear propaganda that reinforces their beliefs, or denouncing gays in the name of atheism, or attempting genocide in the name of atheism. --19:16, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
:If you search for [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22a+trade+union+federation%22+-%22is+a+trade+union+federation%22&hl=en {{mono|["a trade union federation" -"is a trade union federation"&#x5d;}}], most hits will not be about a specific instance. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 14:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 6 =
:People who argue that religion provides a source of support/community are arguing from a modern, liberal, Western, post-Enlightenment perspective. Even in this modern world, religion is more often a source of division than support. If you're gay and every Sunday, you hear a sermon denouncing gays and claiming that every new gay rights law is a work of Satan, would you feel supported? If you're Muslim and hear Islamophobic comments by the religious right, does that strengthen your sense of community with Christian Americans? If you're a Maronite Christian being massacred by Muslims during Lebanon's civil war, or a Muslim being massacred by Christians during that same war, how much community support do you really feel?
:You might say that religion offers support, as long as you believe in the right religion, the right politics (no supporting abortion/gay rights/euthanasia, for example), the right morality (no free sex, no watching porn), and never question the validity of any of this. First of all, I'm not sure it's feasible to change your political, moral, or religious beliefs just to fit in to a religious group. Second, if support is what you're seeking, I'd suggest relatives, friends, classmates, co-workers, and colleagues. Alternatively, join a fraternity or a club that aligns with your real beliefs. Even my religious friends don't depend entirely on people they met in church for support; in fact, the people they most often turn to are relatives and classmates that they met outside of church. --[[Special:Contributions/99.237.252.228|99.237.252.228]] ([[User talk:99.237.252.228|talk]]) 19:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


== What does the [[Thawabit]] consist of? ==
== Democratic roosters ==


I asked about this at the article talk page and WikiProject Palestine, no response. Maybe it's not a question Wikipedia can answer, but I'm curious and it would improve the article. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 09:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Is anyone aware of images (either here or at Commons) featuring roosters as the emblem of the [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party]]? I'm looking for something in which the rooster is the center of attention; something like [[:File:Cleveland-Thurman.jpg]], in which the roosters are hiding near the top, is far from what I need. I'd also be interested if someone could find a PD-old or at least PD-US image online that could be uploaded; I looked but didn't find any. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 18:18, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
*It's acronym (or an abbreviation) for the four principles enumerated in the article. Like how the [[United States Bill of Rights|Bill of Rights]] ''is'' the first ten amendments to the US Constitution. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 13:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
*:''Thawabit'' is short for ''alThawabit alWataniat alFilastinia'', the "Palestinian National Constants". ''Thawabit'' is the plural of ''[[wikt:ثابت#Noun|thabit]]'', "something permanent or invariable; constant". &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
*:What I'm saying is that I'm not sure the article is correct. The sourcing is thin, reference are paywalled, offline, or dead, and Google isn't helpful. Other scholarly and activist sources give different versions of the Thawabet, e.g.[https://books.google.com/books?id=ysdyCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA137&dq=thawabit+palestine&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjSwMDm4NaKAxViElkFHUtYNM0Q6AF6BAgKEAI#v=onepage&q=thawabit%20palestine&f=false This one] adds the release of Palestinian prisoners, [https://www.instagram.com/eu_jps/p/C_D3DSZIL_n/?img_index=8 this one] adds that Palestine is indivisible. The article says that these principles were formulated by the PLO in 1977 but doesn't link to a primary source (like the Bill of Rights). I don't know if you're a subject matter expert here, I'm not--actually trying to figure this out. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 13:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
*::I was able to access the paywalled articles through the Wikipedia library, which adds a little more clarity. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 10:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


:According to [https://books.google.com/books?id=ysdyCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA138&dq=%22+the+objection+to+recognize+the+State+of+Israel+as+the+nation-state+of+the+Jewish+people%22&hl=en this source], a fifth principle was added in 2012: "the objection to recognize the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people". However, I cannot find this in the [https://web.archive.org/web/20131019163530/http://palestineun.org/category/mission-documents/statements/page/2/ cited source] &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
== When was the regency? ==
:::I checked the Arabic Wikipedia article before I responded above, and they list the same four principles. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 13:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::::That appears to be a translation of the English article, so this doesn't mean much to me. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 13:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::I've poked around a little, and there doesn't appear to have been any change. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 13:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::The list in the book I linked to above is not the same as that in our article. The book does not include a "right to resistance", but demands the release by Israel of all Palestinian prisoners. It would be good to have a sourced, authoritative version, in particular the actual 1977 formulation by the PLO. Of course, nothing is so changeable as political principles, so one should expect non-trivial amendments made in the course of time. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 14:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::That book is incorrect. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 21:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::How do you know? &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 00:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::::The text does not explicitly say, "among others", but the use of {{lang|ar|بها بما في ذلك}} suggests that this list of four principles is not exhaustive. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 00:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 7 =
The articles of [[Matilda of Flanders]], [[Matilda of Scotland]] and [[Philippa of Hainault]] states that they were regents during the absence of their respective husbands on several occasions. But the articles does not say when exactly they were regents. When was this? Thank you. --[[User:Aciram|Aciram]] ([[User talk:Aciram|talk]]) 18:59, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


== Is there such a thing as a joke type index? ==
== [[Hawaiian Islands]] ==


Does there exist any map of the islands of Hawaii (other than [[Maui Nui]]) during their volcanic peaks when they were active volcanoes for the other islands west of Maui and into the Hawaiian seamounts?--[[User:KAVEBEAR|KAVEBEAR]] ([[User talk:KAVEBEAR|talk]]) 19:17, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Has anyone produced an index of joke types and schemata (schemes?) along the lines of the [[Aarne–Thompson–Uther Index]] for folk tales? More generally what kind of studies of the structure of jokes and humor are available? Has anyone come up with an A.I. that can generate new jokes? [[Special:Contributions/178.51.8.23|178.51.8.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.8.23|talk]]) 18:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:For starters, there's [[Index of joke types]]. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 21:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:14, 7 January 2025

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
Select a section:
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

  • Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
  • Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
  • Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
  • Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
  • 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.
See also:

December 24

[edit]

Testicles in art

[edit]

What are some famous or iconic depictions of testicles in visual art (painting, sculpture, etc)? Pre 20th century is more interesting to me but I will accept more modern works as well. 174.74.211.109 (talk) 00:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately not pre-20th century, but the first thing that comes to mind is New York's Charging Bull (1989) sculpture, which has a famously well-rubbed scrotum. GalacticShoe (talk) 02:41, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's "iconic"? There's nothing special about testicles in visual arts. All male nudes originally had testicles and penises, unless they fell off (penises tended to do that more, leaving just the testicles) or were removed. There was a pope who couldn't stand them so there's a big room in a basement in the Vatican full of testicles and penises. Fig leaves were late fashion statements, possibly a brainstorm of the aforementioned pope. Here's one example from antiquity among possibly hundreds, from the Moschophoros (genitals gone but they obviously were there once), through the Kritios Boy, through this famous Poseidon that used apparently to throw a trident [1] (über-famous but I couldn't find it on Wikipedia, maybe someone else can; how do they know it's not Zeus throwing a lightning bolt? is there an inscription?), and so many more! 178.51.16.158 (talk) 05:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article you're looking for is Artemision Bronze. GalacticShoe (talk) 07:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And maybe the Cerne Abbas Giant. Shantavira|feed me 10:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bake-danuki, somewhat well-known in the West through Pom Poko.  Card Zero  (talk) 11:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Racoons are often depecited in Japanese art as having big balls. As in 1/4 the size of the rest of their body. 146.90.140.99 (talk) 23:44, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are raccoon dogs, an entirely different species, not even from the same taxonomic family as raccoons. The testicularly spectacularly endowed ones are bake-danuki, referred to in the reply above yours.  --Lambiam 02:28, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

European dynasties that inherit their name from a female: is there a genealogical technical term to describe that situation?

[edit]

The Habsburg were descended (in the male line) from a female (empress Maria Theresa). They were the Habsburg rulers of Austria because of her, not because of their Lorraine male ancestor. So their name goes against general European patrilinear naming customs. Sometimes, starting with Joseph II they are called Habsburg-Lorraine, but that goes against the rule that the name of the father comes first (I've never heard that anyone was called Lorraine-Habsburg) and most people don't even bother with the Lorraine part, if they even know about it.

As far as I can tell this mostly occurs in states where the sovereign happens at some point to be a female. The descendants of that female sovereign (if they rule) sometimes carry her family name (how often? that must depend on how prominent the father is), though not always (cf. queen Victoria's descendants). Another example would be king James, son of Mary queen of Scots and a nobody. But sometimes this happens in families that do not rule over anything (cf. the Chigi-Zondadari in Italy who were descended from a male Zondadari who married a woman from the much more important family of the Chigi and presumably wanted to be associated with them).

What do genealogists, especially those dealing with royal genealogies, call this sort of situation? I'm looking for something that would mean in effect "switch to the mother's name", but the accepted technical equivalent if it exists.

Also do you know of other such situations in European history?

In England where William (Orange) and Mary (Stuart) were joint sovereign did anyone attempt to guess what a line descended from them both would be called (before it became clear such a line would not happen)?

178.51.16.158 (talk) 03:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It happens a fair amount in European history, but I'm not sure it means what you think it means. It's generally a dynastic or patrilineal affiliation connected with the woman which is substituted, not the name of the woman herself. The descendents of Empress Matilda are known as Plantagenets after her husband's personal nickname. I'm not sure that the Habsburg-Lorraine subdivision is greatly different from the Capetian dynasty (always strictly patrilineal) being divided into the House of Artois, House of Bourbon, House of Anjou, etc. AnonMoos (talk) 09:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By the name of the mother I didn't mean her personal name (obviously!) but her line. The example I used of Maria Theresa should have been enough to clarify that. The cases of the Plantagenets (like that of the descendants of Victoria who became known as Saxe-Cobourg, not Hanover) are absolutely regular and do fall precisely outside the scope of my question. The Habsburg-Lorraine are not a new dynasty. The addition of "Lorraine" has no importance, it is purely decorative. It is very different from the switch to collateral branches that happened in France with the Valois, the Bourbon, which happened because of the Salic law, not because of the fact that a woman became the sovereign. Obviously such situations could never occur in places where the Salic law applied. It's happened regularly recently (all the queens of the Netherlands never prevented the dynasty continuing as Oranje or in the case of England as Windsor, with no account whatsoever taken of the father), but I'm not sure how much it happened in the past, where it would have been considered humiliating for the father and his line. In fact I wonder when the concept of that kind of a "prince consort" who is used to breed children but does not get to pass his name to them was first introduced. Note neither Albert nor Geoffrey were humiliated in this way and I suspect the addition of "Lorraine" was just to humor Francis (who also did get to be Holy Roman Emperor) without switching entirely to a "Lorraine" line and forgetting altogether about the "Habsburg" which in fact was the regular custom, and which may seem preposterous to us now given the imbalance of power, but was never considered so in the case of Albert even though he was from an entirely inconsequential family from an entirely inconsequential German statelet. I know William of Orange said he would refuse such a position and demanded that he and Mary be joint sovereign hence "William and Mary". 178.51.16.158 (talk) 10:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a sidenote, the waters of this question are somewhat muddied by the fact that Surnames as we know them were not (even confining ourselves to Europe) always a thing; they arose at different times in different places and in different classes. Amongst the ruling classes, people were often 'surnamed' after their territorial possessions (which could have been acquired through marriage or other means) rather than their parental name(s). Also, in some individual family instances (in the UK, at any rate), a man was only allowed to inherit the property and/or title of/via a female heiress whom they married on the condition that they adopted her family name rather than her, his, so that the propertied/titled family name would be continued. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 13:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or 'surnamed' after their lack of territorial possessions, like poor John Lackland.  --Lambiam 02:09, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the old style of dynastic reckoning, Elizabeth II would have been transitional from Saxe-Coburg to Glucksberg, and even under the current UK rules, descendants of Prince Philip (and only those descendants) who need surnames use Mountbatten-Windsor. -- AnonMoos (talk) 14:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In hyphenated dynasty names, the elements are typically not father and mother but stem and branch: Saxe-Weimar was the branch of the Saxon dukes whose apanage included the city of Weimar, Bourbon-Parma the branch of Bourbon (or Bourbon-Anjou) that included dukes of Parma. —Tamfang (talk) 03:48, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your example of James VI and I is not in fact an example of this: although his mother, Mary, Queen of Scots, was of the of House of Stuart, so was his father, Henry Stuart, Duke of Albany (better known by his earlier title as Lord Darnley). James was therefore a Stuart on both sides. Proteus (Talk) 13:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 25

[edit]

Can Biden commute Military Death Row sentences?

[edit]

Biden commuted nearly all of the Federal Death Row sentences a few days ago. Now, what’s the deal with the Military Death Row inmates? Are they considered "federal" and under the purview of Biden? Or, if not, what’s the distinction? Thanks. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 02:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This page and the various tabs you can click from there include a lot of information. There hasn't been a military execution since 1961 and there are only four persons on the military death row at this point. The President does have the power to commute a death sentence issued under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It is not clear why President Biden did not address those four cases when he commuted the sentences of most federal death row inmates a few days ago, although two of the four cases (see here) are linked to terrorism, so would likely not have been commuted anyway. Xuxl (talk) 14:45, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Does anyone have any idea about why Biden did not commute these death sentences? 32.209.69.24 (talk) 06:17, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, all. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 06:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Coca Romano's portraits of Ferdinand and Marie of Romania

[edit]

I am trying to work out when Coca Romano's coronation portraits of Ferdinand and Marie of Romania were actually completed and unveiled. This is with an eye to possibly uploading a photo of them to this wiki: they are certainly still in copyright in Romania (Romano lived until 1983), but probably not in the U.S. because of publication date.

The coronation took place in 1922 at Alba Iulia. The portraits show Ferdinand and Marie in their full regalia that they wore at the coronation. They appear to have been based on photographs taken at the coronation, so they must have been completed after the event, not before.

A few pieces of information I have: there is no date on the canvasses. The pieces are in the collection of the Brukenthal National Museum in Sibiu (inventory numbers 2503 for the picture of Marie and 2504 for Ferdinand) [Reference for undated and for inventory numbers: [ [2], p. 36-37], and were on display this year at Art Safari in Bucharest, which is where I photographed them. If they were published (always a tricky concept for a painting, but I'm sure they were rapidly and widely reproduced) no later than 1928, or in a few days 1929, we can upload my photo in this wiki. - Jmabel | Talk 04:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(I've uploaded the image to Flickr, if anyone wants a look: https://www.flickr.com/photos/jmabel/54225746973/). - Jmabel | Talk 05:25, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was it ever mentioned in the Bible that the enslaved Jews in Egypt were forced to build the pyramids?

[edit]

The question as topic. I'm pretty rusty on the good book, but I don't recall that it was ever directly specified in Exodus, or anywhere else. But it seems to be something that is commonly assumed. 146.90.140.99 (talk) 23:39, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to this video, the story that the pyramids were built with slave labour is a myth; the builders were skilled workers, "engineers, craftsmen, architects, the best of the best". The people of the children of Israel being forced to work for the Pharaoh is mentioned in Exodus 1:11: "So they put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh.". The pyramids are not mentioned in the Bible.  --Lambiam 02:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I thought that was the case. It's been 30 years since I read the Bible from cover to cover (I mainly just have certain passages highlighted now that I find helpful). But I do remember Zionist people very recently online Facebook claiming that the Jews built the pyramids and that Egyptian nationalists can go fuck themselves with their historical complaints about Israeli invasions of the Sinai Peninsula. 146.90.140.99 (talk) 02:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right. You people can't help yourselves, can you? You didn't have to read the Bible cover to cover to find the answer. It's there in the first paragraphs of the book of Exodus. But you were looking for an excuse to talk about "Zionist people", weren't you? Of course any connection between pyramids and the Sinai is nonsensical (if it was actually made and you didn't just make it up) and there are idiots everywhere including among "Zionist people". Except you're no better, since you decided to post a fake question just to have an excuse to move the "conversation" from Facebook to Wikipedia. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 03:36, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are mistaken. I support Israel 100%. I maybe shouldn't have said "Zionist" but I had a few drinks - what is the correct term to use for people who support Israel??. I was legit interested from half the world away about some historical arguments I saw online. 146.90.140.99 (talk) 03:50, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, Egyptian pyramids (certainly stone pyramids) were mainly an Old Kingdom thing, dating from long before Hyksos rule or Egyptian territorial involvement in the Levant. At most times likely to be relevant to the Exodus narrative, the Valley of the Kings was being used for royal burials... AnonMoos (talk) 03:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The chief pyramid-building era was around the 26th century BCE. Exodus, if it happened, would have been around the 13th century BCE, 1300 years later. A long time; we tend to misunderstand how long the ancient Egyptian period was. Acroterion (talk) 04:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One factoid that turns up here and there is that Cleopatra, as ancient as she is to us, is chronologically closer to our time than to the time the pyramids were built. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots14:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 26

[edit]

What would the president Trump brokered peace treaty in Ukraine look like?

[edit]

I know this is probably speculation, but going by what I've read in a few articles - how would the new president sort this out?

- the war stops

- Russia withdraws all troops from the invaded regions of Ukraine

- Ukraine withdraws all troops from the same regions

- these regions become a DMZ, under control of neither party for the next 25 years, patrolled by the United Nations (or perhaps the USA/Britain and China/North Korea jointly)

- Russia promises to leave Ukraine alone for 25 years

- Ukraine promises not to join NATO or the EU for 25 years

- A peace treaty will be signed

- The can will be kicked down the road for 25 years, at which point more discussions or wars will commence

So maybe the Americans will say "this is the best deal you're going to get, in the future we're going to be spending our money on our own people and no-one else - if you don't take it, we'll let the Russians roll right over you and good luck to you".

Is this basically what is being said now? I think this is what Vance envisioned. 146.90.140.99 (talk) 03:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The downside is that the residents of the buffer zone will be compelled to eat their pets. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots03:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or each other's pets. —Tamfang (talk) 21:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be overlooking one of the major obstacles to peace -- unless it suffers a stinging military defeat, Russia won't withdraw from territories belonging to 1990s Ukraine which it's formally annexed -- Crimea and Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia... -- AnonMoos (talk) 03:14, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, Russia won't withdraw from territories belonging to 1990s Ukraine, but it is likely that Ukraine does not expect Russia to do so too. Restoring to pre-war territories and the independent of Crimean, Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia are the best Ukraine can hope for. Stanleykswong (talk) 10:10, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never heard of any such plan. 25 years? This is completely made up. Can't say I'm surprised since this is the same guy who asked the previous "question". My understanding is that Wikipedia and the Reference Desk are not a forum for debate. This is not Facebook. But this guy seems to think otherwise. Anyway, there's no way that the territories Russia has annexed will ever go back to the Ukraine. The only question which remains is what guarantees can be given to Ukraine that Russia will never try something like this ever again and eat it up piecemeal. The best answer (from Ukraine's point of view) would have been that it join NATO but of course Russia won't have it. If not that, then what? This's exactly where the "art of the deal" comes in. Speculating in advance on Wikipedia is pointless. Better to do that on Facebook. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 03:49, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, by policy Wikipedia is not a forum and not a soapbox. But attend also to the policy Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Oh, and the guideline assume good faith is another good one.  Card Zero  (talk) 10:27, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Further, it's a bit pointless to tell an OP that WP is not a forum or a soapbox, but then immediately engage in debate with them about the matter they raise. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 18:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A politician's butt dominates his brain. What he is going to do is more important than what he had said. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Expect that a concept of a peace plan will be ready soon after day one. Until then we can only speculate whose concept. Will it be Musk's, Trump's, Vance's, Rubio's, Hegseth's, Kellogg's? The latter's plan is believed to involve Ukraine ceding the Donbas and Luhansk regions, as well as Crimea, to Russia,[3] after which the negotiators can proclaim: "Mission accomplished. Peace for our time."  --Lambiam 10:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this one of those "crystal ball" things we are supposed to avoid here? - Jmabel | Talk 21:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree Slowking Man (talk) 00:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the OP provided an actual source for this claim, then it could be discussed more concretely. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots00:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a claim, but a question, "What is being said now about the prospects and form of a Trump-brokered peace treaty?" Should the OP provide a source for this question? If the question is hard to answer, it is not by lack of sources (I gave one above), but because all kinds of folks are saying all kinds of things about it.  --Lambiam 19:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever the plan may be, Putin reportedly doesn't like it.[4]  --Lambiam 22:38, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ID card replacement

[edit]

In California you can get a drivers' license (DL) from the DMV, which both serves as an ID card and attests that you are authorized to drive a car. Alternatively, from the same DMV, you can get a state ID card, which is the same as a DL except it doesn't let you drive. The card looks similar and the process for getting it (wait in line, fill in forms, get picture taken) is similar, though of course there is no driving test.

If you need a replacement drivers' license, you can request it online or through one of the DMV's self-service kiosks installed in various locations. That's reasonably convenient.

If you need a replacement ID card, you have to request it in person at a DMV office, involving travel, waiting in line, dealing with crowds, etc. DMV appointment shortens the wait but doesn't get rid of it. Plus the earliest available appointments are several weeks out.

My mom is elderly, doesn't drive, doesn't handle travel or waiting in line well, and needs a replacement ID card. I'm wondering why this discrepancy exists in the replacement process. Not looking for legal advice etc. but am just wondering if I'm overlooking something sane, rather than reflexive system justification. Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D (talk) 19:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

European (Brit) here, so responding with logic rather than knowledge, but . . . . If a replacement ID could be requested remotely and sent, it would probably be easier for some nefarious person to do so and obtain a fake ID; at least if attendance is required, the officials can tell that the 25-y-o illegal immigrant (say) they're seeing in front of them doesn't match the photo they already have of the elderly lady whose 'replacement' ID is being requested.
Drivers' licences have the additional safeguard that drivers are occasionally (often?) stopped by traffic police and asked to produce them, at which point discrepancies may be evident. {The poster formerly known as 87.812.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 00:30, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I guess there is some sense to that, though I haven't been stopped by police in quite a few years. I reached the DMV by phone and they say they won't issue an actual duplicate ID card: rather, they want to take a new picture of my mom and use that on the new card. Of course that's fine given that we have to go there anyway, but it's another way the DL procedure is different. 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D (talk) 00:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What purpose does the ID card serve? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots04:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See Identity documents in the United States. These cards can be used for such purposes as boarding a plane, purchasing alcohol or cigarettes where proof of age is required, cashing a check, etc. Most folks use their driver's license for these purposes, but for the minority that does not drive, some form of official id is required from time to time, hence the delivery of such cards by states. --Xuxl (talk) 13:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just wondering under what circumstances a shut-in would ever use it. The OP could maybe explain. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots21:52, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OP did not describe a "shut-in". And anyway, have you ever heard the well-known phrase-or-saying "none of your fucking business"? DuncanHill (talk) 21:59, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you the OP? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots22:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not OP and not a shut-in, but ID is necessary for registration for some online services (including ID requirements for access to some state and federal websites that administer things like taxes and certain benefits). I've had to provide photos/scans of photo ID digitally for a couple other purposes, too, though I can't remember off the top of my head what those were. I think one might have been to verify an I-9 form for employment. And the ID number from my driver's license for others. At least a couple instances have been with private entities rather than governments. The security implications always make me wary. -- Avocado (talk) 23:05, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Virtually all of the private information of US citizens has been repeatedly compromised in the last decade. Not a single company or government entity has faced consequences, and no US legislation is in the works to protect our private information in the future. For only one small example, the personal info of 73 million AT&T account holders was released on the dark web this year.[5] In the US, if you're a private company, you can do just about anything and get away with it. If you're a private citizen, there's an entirely separate set of laws for you. Viriditas (talk) 21:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless someone affiliated with the CA DMV drops by here, I'm afraid none of us are going to be able to tell you why something is the way it is with them. Essentially it's requesting people to guess or predict at why X might be the case. Have you tried contacting them and asking them for an answer? You and/or her could also contact her CA state elected representatives and let them know your feelings on the matter. Sometimes representatives' offices will assist a constitutent with issues they're having involving government services ("constitutent services"). --Slowking Man (talk) 01:43, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If your mom is old and her medical condition affects her ability to perform daily activities (she couldn't handle the travel or waiting in line well), she can ask her medical doctor to complete a DS 3234 (Medical Certification) form to verify her status. Then you can help her to fill out a DS 3235 application form on the DMV website and submit the required documents accordingly. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:14, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm wondering why this discrepancy exists in the replacement process.
The Real ID Act contributed to the discrepancy in the replacment process, as did several notable fake ID rings on both coasts.[6][7] In other words, "this is why we can't have nice things". Viriditas (talk) 21:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can't have nice things because those in power regulate the allocation of goods. To distinguish between the deserving and undeserving they need people to have IDs.  --Lambiam 10:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 27

[edit]

Building containing candle cabinets

[edit]

Is there a term (in pretty much any language) for a separate building next to a church, containing candle cabinets where people place votive candles? I've seen this mostly in Romania (and in at least one church in Catalonia), but suspect it is more widespread. (I've also seen just candle cabinets with no separate building, but I'm guessing that there is no term for that.) - Jmabel | Talk 01:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shrine might cover it, but I suspect there's a more specific term in at least one language. {The poster fornerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 21:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody contributed a couple of photos of these kind of cabinets to commons. File:Orthodoxe_Nonne_putzt_Kerzenöfchen.JPG and File:Behälter_für_Opferkerzen_an_einer_orthodoxen_Kirche_in_Rumänien.JPG. Both are in Romania, and outdoor. I suppose the purpose of the cabinet is to protect the candles from the weather? I see pictures of indoor racks for candles. One example is File:Religión en Isla Margarita, Valle del Espíritu Santo.jpg which is an upcoming Commons picture of the day. This small dark metal shed full of dripping wax is apparently located in or near to the rather pretty and well-lit Basilica of Our Lady of El Valle, but I saw nothing to tell me the spatial relationship. Some discussion, again about Romanian Eastern Orthodox traditions, in this Flickr photo's text, which calls them ... candle cabinets. (They protect the candles from wind and rain, and protect the church from the candles.)  Card Zero  (talk) 11:11, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Card Zero: the things you are posting are, precisely, candle cabinets. What I'm talking about are structures like a proper building, but with just a portal, no doors as such. Here's a rare non-Romanian example I photographed in 2001: File:Montserrat - prayer candles.jpg. Remarkably, I don't see any Romanian examples that really show the structure, they are all too close-in detailed. I'll try to see if I can find an example I may have shot but not yet uploaded. - Jmabel | Talk 04:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 28

[edit]

Truncated Indian map in Wikipedia

[edit]

Why is the map of India always appears truncated in all of Wikipedia pages, when there is no official annexing of Indian territories in Kashmir, by Pakistan and China nor its confirmation from Indian govt ? With Pakistan and China just claiming the territory, why the world map shows it as annexed by them, separating from India ? TravelLover05 (talk) 15:05, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The map at India shows Kashmir in light green, meaning "claimed but not controlled". It's not truncated, it's differently included.  Card Zero  (talk) 17:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see no 6 in Talk:India/FAQ ColinFine (talk) 20:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 29

[edit]

Set animal's name = sha?

[edit]

"In ancient Egyptian art, the Set animal, or sha,[citation needed]" - this seems like a major citation needed. Any help? Temerarius (talk) 00:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which article does that appear in? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots01:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It must be this article. Omidinist (talk) 04:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That term was in the original version of the article, written 15 years ago by an editor named "P Aculeius" who is still active. Maybe the OP could ask that user about it? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots05:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Each time, the word šꜣ is written over the Seth-animal.[8]
  • Sometimes the animal is designated as sha (šꜣ) , but we are not certain at all whether this designation was its name.[9]
  • When referring to the ancient Egyptian terminology, the so-called sha-animal, as depicted and mentioned in the Middle Kingdom tombs of Beni Hasan, together with other fantastic creatures of the desert and including the griffin, closely resembles the Seth animal.[10]
  • šꜣ ‘Seth-animal’[11]
  • He claims that the domestic pig is called “sha,” the name of the Set-animal.[12]
Wiktionary gives šꜣ as meaning "wild pig", not mentioning use in connection with depictions of the Seth-animal. The hieroglyphs shown for šꜣ do not resemble those in the article Set animal, which instead are listed as ideograms in (or for) stẖ, the proper noun Seth.  --Lambiam 08:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! The reason I brought it up was because the hieroglyph for the set animal didn't have the sound value to match in jsesh.
Temerarius (talk) 22:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SAAE12
 
E12
The word sha (accompanying
depictions of the Set animal)
in hieroglyphs
IMO they should be removed, or, if this can be sourced, be replaced by one or more of the following two:  --Lambiam 09:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Budge's original drawing and second version of PharaohCrab's drawing; the original looked very different, and this one is clearly based on Budge's as traced by me in 2009, but without attribution.
The article—originally "Sha (animal)" was one of the first I wrote, or attempted to write, and was based on and built on the identification by E. A. Wallis Budge, in The Gods of the Egyptians, which uses the hieroglyph
M8
for the word "sha", and includes the illustration that I traced from a scan and uploaded to Commons (and which was included in the article from the time of its creation in 2009 until December 21, 2024 when User:PharaohCrab replaced it with his original version of the one shown above; see its history for what it looked like until yesterday). I have had very little to do with the article since User:Sonjaaa made substantial changes and moved it to "Seth animal" in 2010; although it's stayed on my watchlist, I long since stopped trying to interfere with it, as it seemed to me that other editors were determined to change it to the way they thought it should be, and I wasn't sophisticated enough to intervene or advocate effectively for my opinions. In fact the only edit by me I can see after that was fixing a typo.
As for the word sha, that is what Budge called it, based on the hieroglyph associated with it; I was writing about this specific creature, which according to Budge and some of the other sources quoted above has some degree of independence from Set, as it sometimes appears without him and is used as the determinative of one or two other deities, whose totemic animal it might also have been. One of the other scholars quoted above questions whether the word sha is the name of the animal, but still associates the word with the animal: Herman Te Velde's article, "Egyptian Hieroglyphs as Signs Symbols and Gods", quoted above, uses slightly modified versions of Budge's illustrations; his book Seth, God of Confusion is also quoted above, both with the transliteration šꜣ, which in "Egyptian Hieroglyphs" he also renders sha. Percy Newberry is the source cited by the Henry Thompson quotation above, claiming that sha referred to a domestic pig as well as the Set animal, and a different god distinct from Set, though sharing the same attributes (claims of which Thompson seems skeptical). Herman Te Velde also cites Newberry, though he offers a different explanation for the meaning of "sha" as "destiny". All Things Ancient Egypt, also quoted above, calls the animal "the so-called sha-animal", while Classification from Antiquity to Modern Times just uses šꜣ and "Seth-animal".
I'm not certain what the question here is; that the hieroglyph transliterated sha is somehow associated with the creature seems to have a clear scholarly consensus; most of the scholars use it as the name of the creature; Herman Te Velde is the only one who suggests that it might not be its name, though he doesn't conclude whether it is or isn't; and one general source says in passing "so-called sha-animal", which accepts that this is what it's typically referred to in scholarship, without endorsing it. Although Newberry made the connection with pigs, none of the sources seems to write the name with pig hieroglyphs as depicted above. Could you be clearer about what it is that's being discussed here? P Aculeius (talk) 16:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
things that start with sh
I asked because I couldn't find it in Gardiner (jsesh, no match when searching by sound value) or Budge (dictionary vol II.)
Temerarius (talk) 05:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 30

[edit]

I do not say the Frenchman will not come. I only say he will not come by sea.

[edit]

1. What is the ultimate source of this famous 1803 quote by John Jervis (1735 – 1823), 1st Earl of St Vincent, First Lord of the Admiralty at the time. I googled Books and no source is ever given except possibly another collection of quotations. The closest I got was: "At a parley in London while First Lord of the Admiralty 1803". That's just not good enough. Surely there must be someone who put this anecdote in writing for the first time.

2. Wouldn't you say this use of the simple present in English is not longer current in contemporary English, and that the modern equivalent would use present continuous forms "I'm not saying... I'm only saying..." (unless Lord Jervis meant to say he was in the habit of saying this; incidentally I do realize this should go to the Language Desk but I hope it's ok just this once)

178.51.7.23 (talk) 11:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming he's talking about England, does he propose building a bridge over the Channel? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots12:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about a tunnel? --Wrongfilter (talk) 12:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a joke. He's saying that the French won't invade under any circumstances (see English understatement). Alansplodge (talk) 20:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The First Lord of the Admiralty wouldn't be the one stopping them if the French came by tunnel (proposed in 1802) or air (the French did have hot air balloons). Any decent military officer would understand that an invasion by tunnel or balloon would have no chance of success, but this fear caused some English opposition against the Channel Tunnel for the next 150 years. Just hinting at the possibility of invasion by tunnel amongst military officers would be considered a joke.
Unless he was insulting the British Army (no, now I'm joking). PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The quoted wording varies somewhat. Our article John Jervis, 1st Earl of St Vincent has it as "I do not say, my Lords, that the French will not come. I say only they will not come by sea" in an 1801 letter to the Board of Admiralty, cited to Andidora, Ronald (2000). Iron Admirals: Naval Leadership in the Twentieth Century. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-313-31266-3.. Our article British anti-invasion preparations of 1803–05 has Jervis telling the House of Lords "I do not say the French cannot come, I only say they cannot come by sea", and then immediately, and without citation, saying it was more probably Keith. I can't say I've ever seen it attributed to Keith anywhere else. DuncanHill (talk) 13:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, Andidora does not in fact say it was in a letter to the Board of Admiralty, nor does he explicitly say 1801. And his source, The Age of Nelson by G J Marcus has it as Jervis telling the House of Lords sometime during the scare of '03-'05. Marcus doesn't give a source. DuncanHill (talk) 13:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Robert Southey was attributing it to Lord St Vincent as early as 1806, and while I don't want to put too much weight on his phrase "used to say" it does at any rate raise the possibility that St Vincent said (or wrote) it more than once. Perhaps Marcus and our St Vincent article are both right. --Antiquary (talk) 16:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Thanks. Some modern accounts (not Southey apparently) claim Lord St Vincent was speaking in the House of Lords. If that was the case, wouldn't it be found in the parliamentary record? How far back does the parliamentary record go for the House of Commons and/or the House of Lords. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 17:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for (2), the tense is still alive and kicking, if I do say so myself. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You don't say? [An idiom actually meaning "You say that, do you?", although I dare say most of you know that.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 02:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not what I am asking. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 05:05, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then I will answer you more directly. You are wrong: while the usage you quote is less common than it once was, it is still current, according to my experience as a native BrE speaker for over 65 years. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 13:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I kid you not.  --Lambiam 23:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What percentage of Ancient Greek literature was preserved?

[edit]

Has anyone seen an estimate of what percentage of Ancient Greek literature (broadly understood: literature proper, poetry, mathematics, philosophy, history, science, etc.) was preserved. It doesn't matter how you define "Ancient Greek literature", or if you mean the works available in 100 BC or 1 AD or 100 AD or 200 AD... Works were lost even in antiquity. I'm just trying to get a rough idea and was wondering if anyone ever tried to work out an estimate. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 17:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an answer handy for you at the moment, but I can tell you that people have tried to work out an estimate for this, at least from the perspective of "how many manuscripts containing such literature managed to survive past the early Middle Ages". We've worked this one out, with many caveats, by comparing library catalogues from very early monasteries to known survivals and estimating the loss rate. -- asilvering (talk) 20:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One estimate is (less than) [13] one percent. --Askedonty (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have a Lost literary work article with a large "Antiquity" section. AnonMoos (talk) 21:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are works known to have existed, because they were mentioned and sometimes even quoted in works that have survived. These known lost works are probably only a small fraction of all that have been lost.  --Lambiam 23:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Few things which might be helpful:
  1. So profuse was Galen's output that the surviving texts represent nearly half of all the extant literature from ancient Greece.[1]
  2. Although not just Greek, but only 1% of ancient literature survives.[2] --ExclusiveEditor 🔔 Ping Me! 11:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following quantities are known: the number of preserved works, the (unknown) number of lost works, and the number of lost works of which we know, through mentions in preserved works. In a (very) naive model, let stand for the probability that a given work (lost or preserved) is mentioned in some other preserved work (so ). The expected number of mentions of preserved works in other preserved works is then If we have the numerical value of the latter quantity (which is theoretically obtainable by scanning all preserved works), we can obtain an estimate for and compute
 --Lambiam 13:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even without seeing any professional estimate of the kind I'm asking about here, my ballpark figure was that it had to be less than 1 percent, simply from noting how little of even the most celebrated and important authors has been preserved (e.g. about 5 percent for Sophocles) and how there are hundreds of authors and hundreds of works for which we only have the titles and maybe a few quotes, not to mention all those works of which we have not an inkling, the number of which it is, for this very reason, extremely hard to estimate.
  • But as a corollary to my first question I have another three:
  • 1. Has any modern historian tackled this paradox, namely the enormous influence that the culture of the Ancient World has had on the West while at the same time how little we actually know about that culture, and as a consequence the problem that we seem to believe that we know much more than we actually do? in other words that our image of it that has had this influence on Western culture might be to some extent a modern creation and might be very different of what it actually was?
  • 2. I understand that in this regard there can be the opposite opinion (or we can call it a hypothesis, or an article of faith) which is the one that is commonly held (at least implicitly): that despite all that was lost the main features of our knowledge of the culture of the Ancient World are secure and that no lost work is likely to have modified the fundamentals? Like I said this seems to be the position that is commonly implicitly held, but I'm interested to hear if any historian has discussed this question and defended this position explicitly in a principled way?
  • 3. Finally to what extent is the position mentioned in point 2 simply a result of ignorance (people not being aware of how much was lost)? How widespread is (in the West) the knowledge of how much was lost? How has that awareness developed in the West, both at the level of the experts and that of the culture in general, since say the 15th century? Have you encountered any discussions of these points?

178.51.7.23 (talk) 08:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issues touched upon are major topics in historiography as well as the philosophy of history, not only for the Ancient (Classical) World but for all historical study. Traditionally, historians have concentrated on the culture of the high and mighty. The imprint on the historical record by hoi polloi is much more difficult to detect, except in the rare instances where they rose up, so what we think of as "the" culture of any society is that of a happy few. Note also that "the culture of the Ancient World" covers a period of more than ten centuries, in which kingdoms and empires rose and fell, states and colonies were founded and conquered, in an endless successions of wars and intrigues. On almost any philosophical issue imaginable, including natural philosophy, ancient philosophers have held contrary views. It is not clear how to define "the" culture of the Ancient World, and neither is it clear how to define the degree to which this culture has influenced modern Western society. It may be argued that the influence of say Plato or Sophocles has largely remained confined to an upper crust. I think historians studying this are well aware of the limitations of their source material, including the fact that history is written by the victors.  --Lambiam 13:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
178.51.7.23 -- Think of it this way: What did it mean to "publish" something in the ancient world? You had at least one written manuscript of your work -- rarely more than a handful of such manuscripts. You could show what you had written to your friends, have it delivered to influential people, bequeath it to your heirs, or donate it to an archive or research collection (almost none of which were meaningfully public libraries in the modern sense of that phrase). However you chose to do it, once you were gone, the perpetuation of your work depended on other people having enough interest in it to do the laborious work of copying the manuscript, or being willing to pay to have a copy made. Works of literature which did not interest other people enough to copy manuscripts of it were almost always eventually lost, which ensured that a lot of tedious and worthless stuff was filtered out. Of course, pagan literary connoisseurs, Christian monks, Syriac and Arabic translators seeking Greek knowledge, and Renaissance Humanists all had different ideas of what was worth preserving, but between them, they ensured that a lot of interesting or engaging or informative works ended up surviving from ancient times. I'm sure that a number of worthy books still slipped through the gaps, but some losses were very natural and to be expected; for example, some linguists really wish that Claudius's book on the Etruscan language had survived, but it's not surprising that it didn't, since it would not have generally interested ancient, medieval, or renaissance literate people in the same way it would interest modern scholars struggling with Etruscan inscriptions.
By the way, college bookstores on or near campuses of universities which had a Classics program sometimes used to have a small section devoted to the small green-backed (Greek) and red-backed (Latin) volumes of the Loeb Classical Library, and you could get an idea of what survived from ancient times (and isn't very obscure or fragmentary) by perusing the shelves... AnonMoos (talk) 01:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed - at the other end of the scale, the Description of Greece by Pausanias seems to have survived into the Middle Ages in a single MS (now of course lost), and there are no ancient references to either it or him known. Since the Renaissance it has been continuously in print. Johnbod (talk) 03:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

December 31

[edit]

Was the fictional character "The Jackal" (as played by Edward Fox and Bruce Willis) based on Carlos The Jackal?

[edit]

Talking about the fictional assassin from the books and films. I once read somewhere that the real Carlos The Jackal didn't like being compared to the fictional character, because he said he was a professional Marxist revolutionary, not merely a hitman for hire to the highest bidder (not in the article about him at the moment, so maybe not true). 146.90.140.99 (talk) 02:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, the character wasn't based on Carlos. The films are based on the 1971 historical fiction novel The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth, which begins with a fairly accurate account of the actual 1962 assassination attempt on Charles de Gaulle by the French Air Force lieutenant colonel Jean Bastien-Thiry, which failed. Subsequently in the fictional plot the terrorists hire an unnamed English professional hitman whom they give the codename 'The Jackal'.
Carlos the Jackal was a Venezuelan terrorist named Ilich Ramírez Sánchez operating in the 1970s and '80s. He was given the cover name 'Carlos' when in 1971 he joined the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. When authorities found some of his weapons stashed in a friend's house, a copy of Forsyth's novel was noticed on his friend's bookshelf, and a Guardian journalist then invented the nickname, as journalists are wont to do. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 03:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's also the fictionalised Ilich Ramírez Sánchez / Carlos the Jackal from the Jason Bourne novels. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

I am on to creating an article on Lu Chun [zh] soon. If anyone has got references about him other than those on google, it would be great if you could share them here. Thanks, ExclusiveEditor 🔔 Ping Me! 11:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you try the National Central Library of Taiwan? The library has a lot of collection about history of Tang dynasty. If you want to write a research paper for publication purpose, you need to know what have been written by others. Then the National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertation in Taiwan under the central library can be a good starting point. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of the Granicus

[edit]

This month some news broke about identification of the Battle of the Granicus site, stating in particular: "Professor Reyhan Korpe, a historian from Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University (ÇOMÜ) and Scientific Advisor to the “Alexander the Great Cultural Route” project, led the team that uncovered the battlefield". However, per Battle of the Granicus#Location it seems that the exact site has been known since at least Hammond's 1980 article. Am I reading the news correctly that what Korpe's team actually did was mapping Alexander’s journey to the Granicus rather than identifying the battle site per se? Per news, "Starting from Özbek village, Alexander’s army moved through Umurbey and Lapseki before descending into the Biga Plain". Brandmeistertalk 23:38, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If Körpe and his team wrote a paper about their discovery, I haven't found it, so I can only go by news articles reporting on their findings. Apparently, Körpe gave a presentation at the Çanakkale Provincial Directorate of Culture and Tourism for an audience of local mayors and district governors,[14] and I think the news reports reflect what he said there. Obviously, the presentation was in Turkish. Turkish news sources, based on an item provided by DHA, quote him as saying, "Bölgede yaptığımız araştırmalarda antik kaynakları da çok dikkatli okuyarak, yorumlayarak savaşın aşağı yukarı tam olarak nerede olduğunu, hangi köyler arasında olduğunu, ovanın tam olarak neresinde olduğunu bulduk." [My underlining] Google Translate turns this into, "During our research in the region, by reading and interpreting ancient sources very carefully, we found out more or less exactly where the war took place, which villages it took place between, and where exactly on the plain it took place." I cannot reconcile "more or less" with "exactly".
The news reports do not reveal the location identified by Körpe, who is certainly aware of Hammond's theory, since he cited the latter's 1980 article in earlier publications. One possibility is that the claim will turn out to have been able to confirm Hammond's theory definitively. Another possibility is that the location they identified is not "more or less exactly" the same as that of Hammond's theory.  --Lambiam 02:08, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 1

[edit]

Has there ever been an incident of a serial killer murdering another serial killer?

[edit]

Question as topic. Has this ever happened outside of the movies? 146.90.140.99 (talk) 05:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is an interesting question. Just because you can't find any incident, doesn't mean this kind of case never happened (type II error). Stanleykswong (talk) 09:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently yes: Dean Corll was killed by one of his his accomplices, Elmer Wayne Henley. --Antiquary (talk) 12:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it would be more notable if the two were not connected to each other. --142.112.149.206 (talk) 08:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you're including underworld figures, this happens not infrequently. As an Aussie, a case that springs to mind was Andrew Veniamin murdering Victor Pierce. Both underworld serial murderers. I'm sure there are many similar cases in organised crime. Eliyohub (talk) 08:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Aren't hired killers distinct from the usual concept of a serial killer? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots09:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Outside the movies? Sure, on TV. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:09, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Dexter character from the multiple Dexter series is based on Pedro Rodrigues Filho, who killed criminals, including murderers. It is necessary to decide how many merders each of those murders did in order to decide if you would want to classify them as serial killers or just general murderers. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 19:04, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like the Death Wish (1974 film) film series might have also drawn inspiration from Filho. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots03:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another serial killer question

[edit]

about 20 years ago, I saw a documentary where it was said that the majority of serial killers kill for sexual gratification, or for some sort of revenge against their upbringing, or because in their head that God (or someone else) told them to kill. But the FBI agent on the documentary said something about how their worst nightmare was an extremely intelligent, methodical killer who was doing what he did to make some sort of grand statement about society/political statement. That this sort of killer was one step ahead of law enforcement and knew all of their methods. Like a Hannibal Lecter type individual. He said that he could count on the fingers of one hand the sort of person who he was talking about, but that these killers were the most difficult of all to catch and by far the most dangerous. Can you tell me any examples of these killers? 146.90.140.99 (talk) 05:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ted Kaczynski ("the Unabomber") comes to mind. --142.112.149.206 (talk) 07:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I second this. Ted the Unabomber only got finally caught by chance, only after his brother happened to recognise him. Eliyohub (talk) 08:43, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
More than a few killed for money; Michael Swango apparently just for joy. The case of Leopold and Loeb comes to mind, who hoped to demonstrate superior intellect; if they had not bungled their first killing despite spending seven months planning everything, more would surely have followed.  --Lambiam 15:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Joseph Paul Franklin. Prezbo (talk) 13:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Missing fire of London

[edit]

British Movietone News covered the burning down of the Crystal Palace in this somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but apparently factual, film. At 00:15 it refers to 'the biggest London blaze since 1892'. What happened in 1892 that could be considered comparable to the Palace's demise, or at least sufficiently well-known to be referred to without further explanation?

I can see nothing in History of London, List of town and city fires, List of fires or 1892. The London Fire Journal records "May 8, 1892 - Scott's Oyster Bar, Coventry Street. 4 dead.", but also lists later fires with larger death tolls. Does anyone have access to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society's article Fires in London and the Metropolitan Fire Brigade in 1892? -- Verbarson  talkedits 13:48, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see the Great Fire of 1892 destroyed half the capital of Newfoundland and Labrador. But comparing that to the Crystal Palace fire, which destroyed only the Crystal Palace, is an odd choice.  Card Zero  (talk) 14:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It would also be odd to call it a "London blaze".  --Lambiam 15:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The closest I found was the 1861 Tooley Street fire. Alansplodge (talk) 16:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also a large fire at Wood Street in the City in 1882 (perhaps later mistaken for 1892?). [15] Alansplodge (talk) 16:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I too wonder whether the Movietone newsreader was the victim of a typo. In December 1897 Cripplegate suffered "the greatest fire...that has occurred in the City since the Great Fire of 1666". [16]. --Antiquary (talk) 11:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC) That's also mentioned, I now see, in Verbarson's London Fire Journal link. --Antiquary (talk) 12:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Verbarson: Fires in London and the Metropolitan Fire Brigade in 1892 is available on JSTOR as part of the Wikipedia Library. It doesn't give details of any individual fires. DuncanHill (talk) 16:51, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@DuncanHill:, so it is. The DOI link in that article is broken; I should have been more persistent with the JSTOR search. Thank you. -- Verbarson  talkedits 17:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unexpectedly, from the Portland Guardian (that's Portland, Victoria): GREAT FIRE IN LIONDON. A great fire is raging in the heart of the London ducks. Dated 26 November 1892.  Card Zero  (talk) 07:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, the poor ducks.  --Lambiam 12:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The whole OCR transcript of that blurred newspaper column is hilarious. "The fames have obtained a firm bold", indeed! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 12:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Setting aside the unsung history of the passionate ducks of London, what I see in that clipping is:
  • 1892 - Australia is still a colony (18+ years to go)
  • which is linked to the UK by (i) long-distance shipping, and (ii) telegraph cables
  • because of (i), the London docks are economically important
  • because of (ii), they get daily updates from London
Therefore, the state of the London docks (and the possible fate of the Australian ships there) is of greater importance to Australian merchants than it is to most Londoners. So headlines in Portland may not reflect the lesser priority of that news in the UK? -- Verbarson  talkedits 17:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was highly impressed by the rapidity of the Victorian Victorian telegraph system there. But my money's on Antiquary's theory, above - I think the newsreel announcer's script had 1892 as a typo for 1897.  Card Zero  (talk) 18:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which I have finally found (in WP) at Timeline of London (19th century)#1890 to 1899 (using the same cite as Antiquary). It does look persuasively big ("The Greatest Fire of Modern Times" - Star), though there were no fatalities. Despite that, an inquest was held. It sounds much more likely than the docks fire to have been memorable in 1936. -- Verbarson  talkedits 19:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


January 4

[edit]

Could the Sack of Jericho be almost

[edit]

historical in the sense that the story of what happened, happened to a different city but was transferred to Jericho?Rich (talk) 05:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It might be. But then again, it might not be. Following whatever links there are to the subject within the article might be a good start for finding out about whatever theories there might be. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots07:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To believe that the events in the story are historical, whether for Jericho or another city, amounts to believing in a miracle. Barring miracles, no amount of horn-blowing and shouting can bring defensive walls down.
Jericho was destroyed in the 16th century BCE. The first version of the Book of Joshua was written in the late 7th century BCE, so there are 9 centuries between the destruction and the recording of the story. An orally transmitted account, passed on through some thirty generations, might have undergone considerable changes, turning a conquest with conventional war practices, possibly with sound effects meant to install fear in the besieged, into a miraculous event.  --Lambiam 10:50, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[Edit Conflicts] The sack was described in the Book of Joshua, which however was likely compiled around 640–540 BCE, some six or seven centuries after the supposed Hebrew conquest of Canaan. Some scholars now discount the whole Exodus and Conquest narrative as political lobbying written by Jewish exiles in Babylonia (which the Persians later took over) hoping to be given control over the former territory of Israel as well as being restored to their native Judah.
The narrative logically explains why a people once 'Egyptian slaves' (like all subjects of the Pharoah) were later free in Canaan, but by then it was likely forgotten that Egypt once controlled almost the entirety of Canaan, from which it withdrew in the Late Bronze Age Collapse. The Hebrew peoples of the (always separate) states of Israel and Judah emerged from Canaanite culture in situ, though minor folk movements (for example, of the Tribe of Levi, who often had Egyptian names) may have had a role. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 10:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I heard the sack of Jericho in book of Joshua was an explanatory myth, not some kind of Exile claim to ownership, which is more logical anyway. If there were a more recent city that was sacked, it would be less than the estimate of 30 geneations of remembrance. I did forget to stress that when I asked if the story could be almost historical that I wasn't suggesting that Jericho's walls were supernaturally destroyed by trumpets. After all, the actual method of conquest in the story could be the connivance of the traitor Rahab.Rich (talk) 02:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, certainly the myth likely existed before it was consolidated with others into the written documents, just as stories about the mythical Danel may have been adapted into the fictional Daniel of the supposedly contemporary Book of Daniel describing his exploits in the 6th century BCE court of Nebuchadnezzar II, although scholars generally agree that this was actually written in the period 167–163 BCE. {The poster formerly knwn as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 07:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Israelites partly emerged in situ (though there was also a definite nomad/pastoralist component), especially along the West Bank hill-chain (running in an approximate north-south direction) where the Four-room house took hold among the rural inhabitants there. They were not originally city-dwellers, and their culture could not have been consolidated until the power of the Canaanite cities in that area had declined, and it's not too hard to believe that they sometimes moved against what cities remained, so that part of the conquest narrative is not necessarily a pure myth. Jericho was in the valley (not along the hill-chain), so was not part of the core settled rural agricultural four-room house area, but was inhabited more by pastoralists/animal-herders who became affiliated... AnonMoos (talk) 21:19, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility, for URLs in text document

[edit]

We've been asked to increase the accessibility of all documents we produce, esp. syllabi. I use WordPerfect, where I don't seem to be able to have a URL with a descriptive text in the way Word allows. 508 is the operative term. I'm trying this out: "Princeton University has some handy tips on what is called “active reading, on this webpage: https://mcgraw.princeton.edu/active-reading-strategies." In other words, descriptive text followed by a bare URL. Is that good for screen readers? Graham87, how does this look/sound to you? Thanks for your help, Drmies (talk) 18:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: I wouldn't make a general rule about that as it's context-dependent ... depending on how many URL's are in a document, reading them might get annoying. In general I'd prefer to read a link with descriptive text rather than a raw URL, because the latter aren't always very human-readable ... but I don't think this is really an accessibility issue; just do what would make sense for a sighted reader here. Graham87 (talk) 00:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Graham87, thanks. There's only one or two in a ten-page document. According to our bosses, this is an accessibility issue--but it seems to me as if someone sounded an alarm and now everyone who doesn't actually know much about the issue is telling us to comply with a set of directives which they haven't given us. Instead, we are directed to some self-help course that involves only Word. It's fun. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stop using WordPerfect and start using Word. --Viennese Waltz 07:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why, but it seems many legal professionals prefer WordPerfect. Stanleykswong (talk) 10:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Viennese Waltz, thanks so much for that helpful suggestion. Drmies (talk) 15:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can create a hyperlink to a file using WordPerfect. First, you select text or a graphic you want to create a hyperlink. Then you click “Tools”, select “Hyperlink” and then type a path or document you want to link to. Stanleykswong (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stanleykswong, that sounds like it might work: thank you. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do web browsers display WordPerfect documents? I don't think I have a WordPerfect viewing app installed on my platform (macOS). Does anyone have a URL of a WordPerfect document handy?  --Lambiam 14:56, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Lambiam, WP translates easily to PDF and to Word. I use PDFs in my LMS. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can see why WordPerfect is popular in legal circles at WordPerfect#Key characteristics (fourth bullet point) and WordPerfect#Faithful customers. 2A00:23A8:1:D801:8C31:BAC2:88CF:A92B (talk) 16:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have the feeling this answers my question. Would I have to find and install an app that translates .wpd documents to .pdf or .doc documents? Would I then be able to tell my browser to use this app? The question is informative, not meant to bash a product that I have zero familiarity with.  --Lambiam 17:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've opened early WordPerfect (WP 5.1) documents using both Word and Firefox without any need for a third party translator. The only trick was changing the file extension to .WPD so that my computer could create the file association more easily. In the old days, file extensions were not so rigorously restrictive and many files ended up with extensions like .01 or .v4 or whatever. Matt Deres (talk) 17:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot check if it would work for me, for lack of access to any WordPerfect document of any age.  --Lambiam 21:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a bunch of them, in the DOJ archives.  Card Zero  (talk) 00:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, finally an answer. When I click on a .wpd link, the file is downloaded. I can then open and view it with LibreOffice. (I can also open it with OpenOffice, but then I get to see garbage like ╖#<m\r╛∞¼_4YÖ¤ⁿVíüd╤?Y.)  --Lambiam 14:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, web browsers do display WordPerfect documents. If you google “wpd online viewer”, you will find a lot of them. Stanleykswong (talk) 23:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When I google [“wpd online viewer”], I get two hits, one to this page and one to a site where you can upload a WPD document in order to be able to view it online. What happens when you view an html page with something like <a href="file:///my-document.wpd">Looky here!</a> embedded?  --Lambiam 13:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right. Only Docx2doc (https://www.docx2doc.com/convert) and Jumpshare provide online viewers now. However, there are still other offline alternative, such as Cisdem (https://www.cisdem.com/document-reader-mac.html) and Apache. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Some other text editors, such as TextMaker, can open and view WPD files. However, after editing, the WPD files can only be saved as other formats, such as docx or doc. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing that just came up--we got rapped on the fingers though the mandatory "training" didn't touch on it. We've been told that hyphens are bad. The internet tells me that screenreaders have trouble with hyphenated words, but does this apply also to date ranges? Graham87, does yours get this right, "Spring Break: 17-21 March"? For now I'm going with "Spring Break, 17 to 21 March", but it just doesn't look good to my traditional eyes. And on top of that I have to use sans serif fonts... Drmies (talk) 17:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • To give another example, I have to redo this: "Final grades are computed along the following scale: A: 90-100; B+: 87-89; B: 80-86; C+: 77-79; C: 70-76; D+: 67-69; D: 60-66; F: Below 60." Drmies (talk) 17:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 5

[edit]

How to search for awkwardly named topics

[edit]

On and off I've been looking for good sources for the concepts of general union and trade union federation so as to improve the articles, but every time I try I only get one or two somewhat helpful results. Many of the results are not of material about the concepts of general union or trade union federations, but often about a specific instance of them, and as a result hard to gleen a lot from about the broader concept. Typcially this is because of issues such as many general unions being named as such (for example Transport & General Workers' Union). I'm aware of the search trick that'd be something like "general union" -Transport & General Workers' Union but I've found it largely cumbersome and ineffective, often seeming to filter out any potential material all together

Thought I'd ask because I'd like to improve those articles, and this is an issue I'm sure would come up again for me otherwise on other articles Bejakyo (talk) 13:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do any of the articles listed at Unionism help? Blueboar (talk) 14:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you search for ["a trade union federation" -"is a trade union federation"], most hits will not be about a specific instance.  --Lambiam 14:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 6

[edit]

What does the Thawabit consist of?

[edit]

I asked about this at the article talk page and WikiProject Palestine, no response. Maybe it's not a question Wikipedia can answer, but I'm curious and it would improve the article. Prezbo (talk) 09:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's acronym (or an abbreviation) for the four principles enumerated in the article. Like how the Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments to the US Constitution. Abductive (reasoning) 13:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thawabit is short for alThawabit alWataniat alFilastinia, the "Palestinian National Constants". Thawabit is the plural of thabit, "something permanent or invariable; constant".  --Lambiam 13:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What I'm saying is that I'm not sure the article is correct. The sourcing is thin, reference are paywalled, offline, or dead, and Google isn't helpful. Other scholarly and activist sources give different versions of the Thawabet, e.g.This one adds the release of Palestinian prisoners, this one adds that Palestine is indivisible. The article says that these principles were formulated by the PLO in 1977 but doesn't link to a primary source (like the Bill of Rights). I don't know if you're a subject matter expert here, I'm not--actually trying to figure this out. Prezbo (talk) 13:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I was able to access the paywalled articles through the Wikipedia library, which adds a little more clarity. Prezbo (talk) 10:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to this source, a fifth principle was added in 2012: "the objection to recognize the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people". However, I cannot find this in the cited source  --Lambiam 13:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the Arabic Wikipedia article before I responded above, and they list the same four principles. Abductive (reasoning) 13:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That appears to be a translation of the English article, so this doesn't mean much to me. Prezbo (talk) 13:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've poked around a little, and there doesn't appear to have been any change. Abductive (reasoning) 13:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The list in the book I linked to above is not the same as that in our article. The book does not include a "right to resistance", but demands the release by Israel of all Palestinian prisoners. It would be good to have a sourced, authoritative version, in particular the actual 1977 formulation by the PLO. Of course, nothing is so changeable as political principles, so one should expect non-trivial amendments made in the course of time.  --Lambiam 14:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That book is incorrect. Abductive (reasoning) 21:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How do you know?  --Lambiam 00:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The text does not explicitly say, "among others", but the use of بها بما في ذلك suggests that this list of four principles is not exhaustive.  --Lambiam 00:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 7

[edit]

Is there such a thing as a joke type index?

[edit]

Has anyone produced an index of joke types and schemata (schemes?) along the lines of the Aarne–Thompson–Uther Index for folk tales? More generally what kind of studies of the structure of jokes and humor are available? Has anyone come up with an A.I. that can generate new jokes? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 18:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, there's Index of joke types. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots21:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]