Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities: Difference between revisions
→Questions: +c |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<noinclude> |
<noinclude>{{Wikipedia:Reference desk/header|WP:RD/H}} |
||
[[Category: |
[[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]] |
[[Category:Wikipedia reference desk|Humanities]] |
||
[[Category:Wikipedia help pages with dated sections]] |
|||
</noinclude> |
|||
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]</noinclude> |
|||
= |
= December 29 = |
||
== Set animal's name = sha? == |
|||
== Is there any correlation between the areas of Roundhead and Labour support in UK elections? == |
|||
"In ancient Egyptian art, the Set animal, or sha,[citation needed]" - this seems like a major citation needed. Any help? |
|||
The Vendee of France, Southern states of USA, Peloponnese of Greece remain the most conservative areas of their nation as part of longterm sociopolitical trends. Perhaps based on very long duree rural/urban divides. In France there is still a direct correlation between Legitimist-Jacobin areas and Socialist-Gaullist areas today. |
|||
[[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''. --[[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: --[[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 was wondering if there was anything like this in the UK? Any correlations between the areas of Roundhead and Cavalier support during the English Civil War and current Labour and Tory constituencies. Likewise in Scotland between areas of Covenantor and Jacobite support and current SNP/ Labour trends. --[[User:Gary123|Gary123]] ([[User talk:Gary123|talk]]) 00:51, 9 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
: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) |
|||
:Not really, except that the larger towns often declared for Parliament, whereas the countryside often stayed loyal to the Crown, which perhaps echoes today's urban support for Labour and rural / suburban Conservatism. The real hotbed of Parliamentarianism was rural [[East Anglia]], which is nowadays mainly Conservative with a hint of LibDem. The main issue in the [[English Civil War]] and its [[Bishops' Wars|Scottish adjunct]] was chiefly religious, an issue on which (Northern Ireland aside) we seem to be able to rub along pretty well today, perhaps because many people don't really care about it. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 08:51, 9 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Here are the maps, judge for yourself. [[User:Bosstopher|Bosstopher]] ([[User talk:Bosstopher|talk]]) 10:39, 9 May 2015 (UTC) [[File:2015UKElectionMap.svg|250px]] [[File:English civil war map 1642 to 1645.JPG|250px]] |
|||
:[[File:Budgesh.png|thumb|things that start with sh]] |
|||
== Are there any universities today that have a post-positivist or anti-positivist curriculum for political science? == |
|||
: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 = |
|||
Positivism is no doubt the most dominant approach in political science. The number of quantitative courses in political science is catching up with that of their qualitative counterparts. Given this trend, are there any schools today that focus almost exclusively on the historical and other qualitative approaches to political science?[[User:Rja2015|Rja2015]] ([[User talk:Rja2015|talk]]) 16:10, 9 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== I do not say the Frenchman will not come. I only say he will not come by sea. == |
|||
:[[Sussex European Institute]] is pretty critical of positivism.[[User:Itsmejudith|Itsmejudith]] ([[User talk:Itsmejudith|talk]]) 19:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
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. |
|||
:[[Positivism]] needs a link here. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 00:24, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
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) |
|||
== 1850 Double "O" Double Eagle == |
|||
[[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) |
|||
:See [[Liberty Head double eagle]] for our article on the coin - the "O" on a particular coin indicates it was produced at the [[New Orleans Mint]]. Looking through some listings ([http://fineartxonline.com/2015/02/02/how-do-i-get-1882-o-morgan-multiple-strike-1-seller-ms-61-2015/ here], for instance), "Double O" appears to indicate a double-strike, so that the mint mark appears twice on the coin. [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] ([[User talk:Tevildo|talk]]) 22:56, 9 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::How about a [[Channel_Tunnel#Earlier_proposals|tunnel]]? --[[User:Wrongfilter|Wrongfilter]] ([[User talk:Wrongfilter|talk]]) 12:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{ec}}In numismatics, descriptions such as "double O" usually mean a mis-struck coin on which the "O" appears blurry or as if there were two "O"s on top of each other. See [https://www.google.com/search?q=double+struck+coin&safe=off&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=0ZBOVfmcG9b8oQS3zIDgCQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1726&bih=795 these double struck coins] for terribly mis-struck coins. Coins described as "double O" or "double 9" usually just show defects in that one letter/digit. It's been a long time since I was active in numismatics, but I do remember 1850 is one of the rarest years for collectible Double Eagles and I don't recall there being a "double O" variety. [http://www.pcgscoinfacts.com/Coin/Detail/8903 This PCGS resource] doesn't mention any either. However, that doesn't mean that there aren't a few individual coins that may show errors on the "O" still around. It is called a "Double Eagle" because the [[Eagle (United States coin)]] was worth $10, so the "Double Eagle" was originally worth $20.--[[User:WilliamThweatt|William Thweatt]] <sup>[[User talk:WilliamThweatt|Talk]]</sup><sup>[[Special:Contributions/WilliamThweatt|Contribs]]</sup> 23:13, 9 May 2015 (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) |
|||
== Is England and/or Britain really planning to leave the EU unless they can get more Big Brother laws? == |
|||
: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. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 23:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== What percentage of Ancient Greek literature was preserved? == |
|||
According to [http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/election-may-set-britain-on-a-path-to-becoming-little-england/2015/05/09/80316f94-f4fb-11e4-bca5-21b51bbdf93e_story.html], "Cameron has projected ambivalence on the issue, saying he wants the country to remain inside Europe, but only if he can win critical changes to the E.U. charter — changes his European allies have repeatedly said they are unwilling to grant." The article doesn't explain that; searching recent news I found [http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/12/david-cameron-pledges-anti-terror-law-internet-paris-attacks-nick-clegg] which says "Following the 7/7 bombings in London in 2005, the British shaped an EU data retention directive, adopted the following year, allowing the capture and storage of electronic communications. But last April the European Court of Justice struck down the directive as in breach of the EU’s charter of fundamental rights." (It also talks about Cameron seeking to ban encryption, even [[Snapchat]]!) |
|||
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) |
|||
Is the British leadership, newly ratified by its people, really so dead-set on expanding spying beyond even the current extraordinary state that they would leave the EU to be <strike>hindered</strike> rid of troublesome constitutional limits? [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 23:08, 9 May 2015 (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) |
|||
:By "hindered of" do you mean "rid of" ? And it might just be a negotiating tactic, but the whole point would then be to convince everyone it's not just a bluff, making it difficult for us to know. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 00:11, 10 May 2015 (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) |
|||
:Per the header on every reference desk '''We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.''' You should know this. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 02:05, 10 May 2015 (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. --[[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> |
|||
::The first news article made a statement: "Cameron has projected ambivalence on the issue, saying he wants the country to remain inside Europe, but '''only if he can win critical changes to the E.U. charter — changes his European allies have repeatedly said they are unwilling to grant.'''" My question is what those changes are. The article refers to past-tense discussions about them, so they should be known, no crystal ball required. [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 02:58, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
: --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::<small>The side standing up for freedom to compute and against overweening state presence is — the ''EU''? God help us. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 03:39, 10 May 2015 (UTC) </small> |
|||
:See [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/10700610/David-Cameron-my-seven-targets-for-a-new-EU.html this article] from the ''[[Daily Telegraph]]'' (with a linked video of David Cameron's speech) for his opinions on the subject as expressed last year. The main issues are border controls and immigration, and [[Parliamentary sovereignty in the United Kingdom|Parlimentary soveriegnty]] - although he doesn't mention them explicitly, the two main factors in this area which have raised political hackles recently are prisoner voting rights (see ''[[Hirst v United Kingdom (No 2)]]'') and [[whole-life tariff]]s, not anti-terrorism legislation specifically. [http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/08/europe-david-cameron-eu-demands-tory-election-win This article] from the ''[[Manchester Guardian|Guardian]]'' says "[T]he expectation in EU capitals is that the prime minister will unfold his shopping list at a Brussels summit on 21 June." [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] ([[User talk:Tevildo|talk]]) 08:01, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::I should recap that the first article cites the following: |
|||
::1 New controls to stop “vast migrations” across the continent when new countries join the EU; |
|||
::2 Tighter immigration rules to ensure that migrants come to Britain to work, not as tourists planning to cash in on “free benefits”; |
|||
::3 A new power for groups of national parliaments to work together to block unwanted European legislation; |
|||
::4 Businesses to be freed from red tape and “excessive interference” from Brussels, and given access to new markets through “turbo charging” free trade deals with America and Asia; |
|||
::5 British police and courts liberated from “unnecessary interference” from the European Court of Human Rights; |
|||
::6 More power “flowing away” from Brussels to Britain and other member states, rather than increasingly centralising laws in the EU; |
|||
::7 Abolishing the principle of “ever closer union” among EU member states, which Mr Cameron says is “not right for Britain”. |
|||
:: So it appears #5 really is to scrap any EU bill of rights, which so far as I know would leave Britain entirely without one. Scrapping the [[Schengen Area]] seems to be the gist of 1 and 2. I don't understand the others as well, but it amazes me that the two best things I know of about the EU are the things he campaigned on getting rid of, and the public supports him on that. [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 12:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::AFAIK the Conservative Party under David Cameron wants to replace the [[Human Rights Act 1998]] with a new UK Bill of Rights [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/conservative-party-conference-cameron-announces-plans-to-scrap-human-rights-act-9767435.html] [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11594853/Michael-Gove-appointed-Justice-Secretary-in-David-Camerons-reshuffle.html]. Ideally I think the Conservative Party doesn't want the [[European Convention on Human Rights]] to be considered at all by the [[European Court of Human Rights]] or to be able to ignore it if they do [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/11136146/A-British-Bill-of-Rights-should-be-welcomed.html]. And [[Parliamentary sovereignty in the United Kingdom]] may mean the Bill of Rights would have a more limited effect on laws, whatever the talk of entrenchment. So there are concerns over what the new Bill of Rights will actually mean if the Conservative Party get their way (although wikipedia isn't the place to discuss such concerns). But I don't think it's Conservative Party policy to have no bill of rights. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 14:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::Maybe, though it amazes me that people would support a "To Be Announced" bill of rights. [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 15:24, 10 May 2015 (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. |
|||
:Forty years ago it was the Labour government seeking renegotiations and holding an "in/out" [[United Kingdom European Communities membership referendum, 1975|referendum]]. However, the government went on to campaign to remain in what was at that time the EEC, supported by the Conservative opposition, led by Margaret Thatcher. [[User:Thincat|Thincat]] ([[User talk:Thincat|talk]]) 08:26, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
* But as a corollary to my first question I have another three: |
|||
::Yes, sounds ironic if one doesn't look at the difference, but fourty years ago the idea was a free-trade customs union, not a metastasizing Brusselocracy. Britain has never surrendered monetary sovereignty. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 16:31, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
* 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? |
|||
= May 10 = |
|||
* 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? |
|||
== Is it easier to sell a commercial property in China with or without a restaurant lessee? == |
|||
{{hat|We don't answer requests for opinions.... If you need specific advice (for example, medical, legal, financial or risk management), please seek a professional who is licensed or knowledgeable in that area.}} |
|||
Thanks. [[User:Imagine Reason|Imagine Reason]] ([[User talk:Imagine Reason|talk]]) 09:47, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
*We can neither offer an opinion nor financial or legal advice. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 14:51, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
{{hab}} |
|||
* 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? |
|||
== Debt == |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 08:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:See [[List of countries by external debt]]. <span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml"><font face="MV Boli" color="blue">[[User:KageTora|KägeTorä - (<sup>影</sup><sub>虎</sub>)]] ([[User talk:KageTora|もしもし!]])</font></span> 12:32, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::That list includes private debt, a table which shows the amount that governments are in debt would be found at [[List of countries by public debt]] under the heading "Net government debt as % of GDP". [[Special:Contributions/173.32.72.65|173.32.72.65]] ([[User talk:173.32.72.65|talk]]) 18:18, 10 May 2015 (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. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Jehovah's Witnesses and the name "Jehovah" == |
|||
: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. |
|||
I have two questions regarding the [[Jehovah's Witnesses]], both involving their use of the name "[[Jehovah]]". |
|||
: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 = |
|||
1. Exactly why did they decide on the name ''Jehovah's'' Witnesses? I am aware that the "Witnesses" part comes from Isaiah 43:10, but that verse says "Ye are my witnesses, saith ''the LORD''" ("the LORD" originally being the Tetragrammaton, usually rendered in Bibles as such, though some Bibles, notably the Witnesses' [[New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures|New World Translation]], render it as "Jehovah" instead), and not all Bibles render the Tetragrammaton as "Jehovah", so why did they choose the name "Jehovah" in particular, rather than use, say "Yahweh's Witnesses", "Christ's Witnesses", or "God's Witnesses"? |
|||
== Was the fictional character "The Jackal" (as played by Edward Fox and Bruce Willis) based on Carlos The Jackal? == |
|||
2. Biblical scholarship , before, during, and after the time of Joseph F. Rutherford (the Watchtower President who introduced the name "Jehovah's Witnesses") had debunked the name "Jehovah", saying that the word would have been impossible in ancient Hebrew, and most scholars today that the Tetragrammaton was originally pronounced "Yahweh". Why do the Witnesses continue to use the name "Jehovah" when it has already been debunked by scholars? |
|||
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) |
|||
And before anyone asks, I've read the relevant articles on the Witnesses and Jehovah, but neither of these articles answer my question, other than, to quote our article on [[Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs]], they "believe only their religion is making God's name known." |
|||
: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'. |
|||
{{ping|Wavelength}} {{ping|Jeffro77}} |
|||
:[[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 == |
|||
[[User:Narutolovehinata5|Narutolovehinata5]] <sup>[[User talk:Narutolovehinata5|t]][[Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5|c]][[WP:CSD|csd]][[Special:Newpages|new]]</sup> 15:13, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:It ''is'' briefly mentioned in the article of [[Jehovah]], saying that they use the [[Authorized King James Version]] (1611) version of the Bible as an example, it uses the word Jehovah. <span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml"><font face="MV Boli" color="blue">[[User:KageTora|KägeTorä - (<sup>影</sup><sub>虎</sub>)]] ([[User talk:KageTora|もしもし!]])</font></span> 15:38, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::{{ping|KageTora}} The article does not mention why they decided to use "Jehovah" rather than, say "Yahweh". [[User:Narutolovehinata5|Narutolovehinata5]] <sup>[[User talk:Narutolovehinata5|t]][[Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5|c]][[WP:CSD|csd]][[Special:Newpages|new]]</sup> 23:01, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
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) |
|||
:Your first question is answered by their article at http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102012143, and your second question is answered by their article at http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002391. |
|||
:—[[User:Wavelength|Wavelength]] ([[User talk:Wavelength|talk]]) 16:52, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::{{ping|Wavelength}} Neither of your links answered my questions. The first link does not mention exactly why they decided to use the name "Jehovah" rather than "Yahweh" or other transliterations of the Tetragrammaton. The second link, on the other hand, does not mention exactly why they continue to use the name "Jehovah" even though they acknowledge that the Tetragrammaton was most likely pronounced "Yahweh". Given that they believe that the use of God's personal name is important, I would have assumed that they would have made steps to ensure that the name they actually used was historically correct (meaning they would have dropped "Jehovah" as soon as scholarly consensus that it was inaccurate took hold and used "Yahweh" instead). [[User:Narutolovehinata5|Narutolovehinata5]] <sup>[[User talk:Narutolovehinata5|t]][[Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5|c]][[WP:CSD|csd]][[Special:Newpages|new]]</sup> 23:01, 10 May 2015 (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) |
|||
:::Did you read http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002391?q=%22What+is+the+proper+pronunciation+of+God’s+name%22&p=par? |
|||
:::—[[User:Wavelength|Wavelength]] ([[User talk:Wavelength|talk]]) 00:31, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Battle of the Granicus == |
|||
:The JHV part, at least, was the Latinized version of YHW(H).[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=jehovah&searchmode=none] ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 03:15, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Prior to the Watch Tower Society's production of their own translation, the JWs generally preferred the [[American Standard Version]], which uses ''Jehovah'' throughout. JWs' emphasis on the name ''Jehovah'' was primarily a result of Joseph Rutherford's efforts to distinguish his group from other Bible Student movement groups (who preferred the ''King James Version''), with special emphasis of the name beginning in 1926. Prior to Rutherford, Charles Russell only occasionally used the name ''Jehovah'', and did not use that name exclusively. See also [[Development of Jehovah's Witnesses doctrine#1920–1929]] and [[American Standard Version#Usage by Jehovah's Witnesses]]. The reason JWs continue to prefer the term not preferred by scholars is much the same as Rutherford's—to appear distinctive.--[[User:Jeffro77|<span style='color:#365F91'>'''Jeffro'''</span><span style='color:#FFC000'>''77''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jeffro77|talk]]) 08:22, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
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) |
|||
== Non-fiction Classification Pre-Dewey Decimal == |
|||
: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". |
|||
What were the various ways that libraries classified non-fiction books before the widespread adoption of the Dewey Decimal System? <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.183.146.98|75.183.146.98]] ([[User talk:75.183.146.98|talk]]) 15:26, 10 May 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
: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. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 02:08, 2 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:What an interesting question to research. I've stumbled across [http://ixtrieve.fh-koeln.de/DDC/DDCde/LandC_33_2_Wiegand.pdf The "Amherst Method": The Origins of the Dewey Decimal Classification Scheme"]; not sure if this has the answer to your question, but it's an interesting read about the history of the Dewey system. [[User:Jpgordon|--jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|::==( o )]]</small></sup> 15:55, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Some classified books by alphabetically by title, or by author's name. Believe it or not, some even organized them by physical size. Bear in mind that this wasn't as big of a problem in many cases as it would be today, since many libraries of the period had closed stacks, i.e. you had to request the book you wanted, and you couldn't just go and get it yourself. In such a situation, classification only serves to make it simpler for the librarian to find books when asked: if you're really familiar with a small collection, you can use whatever idiosyncratic system you feel like, since you're the only one using it. However, some libraries did classify by subject; the basis of the current Library of Congress collection is Thomas Jefferson's personal library (they bought it after the British [[Burning of Washington|burned the original collection]]), and if I remember rightly, the [[Library of Congress Classification]] system was developed from the subject classification that Jefferson had himself used. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 19:49, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::Au contraire; it was designed specifically to replace Jefferson's "fixed location system", at least according to Wikipedia. [[User:Jpgordon|--jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|::==( o )]]</small></sup> 20:55, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::Not sure what that means; it would help if the article had a citation there. See [http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/jefferson/jefflib.html the Library's page about Jefferson's books]. "In Thomas Jefferson's day, most libraries were arranged alphabetically. But Jefferson preferred to arrange his by subject. He chose Lord Bacon's table of science, the hierarchy of Memory (History), Reason (Philosophy) and Imagination (Fine Arts) to order his arrangement of books by subject with some modifications. The resulting arrangement as illustrated in the Nicholas Trist (1800–1870) copy of Jefferson's library catalog for 1815 is a combination of subject and chronology. In practice, however, Jefferson shelved his books by size." [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 21:42, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::[[Cambridge University Library]] uses a fixed location system: the index is primarily by subject, but the final reference to a book is not just to the subject area within the library, but to the specific shelf and the number of the volume on that shelf. --[[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 17:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
= January 1 = |
|||
== Question about how WW2 ended the Great Depression in America == |
|||
== Has there ever been an incident of a serial killer murdering another serial killer? == |
|||
I'm trying to understand how is this not a broken windows fallacy? Let's say you have two parallel universe one where WW2 happened and one where it didn't. Let's say in this parallel universe, they spend tons of money on military technology just like we do, except the only difference is that it's not actually being used in warfare. So it's just building up more and more weaponry. Where does any additional wealth come from? Sure specific entities can get richer, the ones who make the weapons, but the country overall doesn't acquire any new wealth in fact it just loses money from dumping it all into weaponry. So it stands to reason that the great depression wasn't ended simply due to massive military spending, wealth had to be acquired externally correct? [[User:Malamockq|Malamockq]] ([[User talk:Malamockq|talk]]) 18:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:It's a common myth that you're talking about. Fighting doesn't help the economy, what helped end the great depression was the government's massive spending which created a massive number of local jobs. [[Special:Contributions/173.32.72.65|173.32.72.65]] ([[User talk:173.32.72.65|talk]]) 18:24, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::But of course the wealth didn't come from nowhere; the government got vast amounts of additional money from war bonds and higher taxes, so people would have had less to spend by themselves. However, the citizenry became more productive (tons and tons of people working extra hours; tons of women entering the workforce, etc.), and anyway average people were more willing to see higher taxes and to buy government bonds because average people were strongly in favor of the war. The same situation wouldn't have worked to a comparable extent had the citizenry been divided in 1943 as strongly as they were a quarter-century later. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 19:46, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
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) |
|||
:The [[Excess profits tax]] stalled the [[Trickle-up effect]]. Thus, workers had more money and freed up more [[working capital]]. Thus, the US economy came out of the war richer than when it entered. Think of it in terms that when a CEO spends oodles of dollars on a luxury yacht, he is actually diverting away money that could go into something that produces more wealth for the US in general. The Excess Profits Tax kept those oodles of dollars in the economy. --[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] ([[User talk:Aspro|talk]]) 20:53, 10 May 2015 (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) |
|||
*The above [[Keynesianism]] is utter rubbish. Given the privations during the war, American workers who'd been digging and refilling ditches in the 30's came home and built homes and cars and fridges in the late 40's. Just as we ended the makework of the New Deal once the war was over, Britain immediately adopted outright socialism and continued to starve for another 5 years. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 21:18, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Citation needed on that one. Precisely which British post-war policy adversely affected the food supply and how? [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 21:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::If Medeis googled Quaker Capitalism she would realize that I was not talking Keynesianism. So just forget her comment as not applicable.--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] ([[User talk:Aspro|talk]]) 22:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::As usual Medy is applying politics to reality, thereby turning it into utter bollocks. The recovery of the US from the Great Depression in the classic example of how Keynesianism works. Just because the idiotic Austrian economics are fashionable at the moment, doesn't make that any less true. Moreover, Britain did not 'starve' at any point during or after the war, in fact nutrition was better at the end of the war than at the start. Less varied? Sure. Starving? Complete bollocks. Don't make up nonsense to try and defend a flawed anachronistic political point, Medy! [[User:Fgf10|Fgf10]] ([[User talk:Fgf10|talk]]) 22:28, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Don't forget that before the [[Lend-Lease]] Act in March 1941, the huge quantity of US made munitions and other supplies being sold to the UK (and initially France) was being paid for in gold bullion. Lend-Lease came about when the UK was nearing the bottom of the barrel. See [[Cash and carry (World War II)]] and [[British Purchasing Commission]] which says; ''"By December 1940 British cash orders for aircraft had exceeded $1,200,000,000."'' [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 21:35, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Back to the original question — see [[Parable of the broken window]], to which "Broken window fallacy" redirects. I initially misunderstood and was confused how it could at all be related to [[Broken windows theory]]. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 21:47, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Yes, I was answering the original question which states '"...the country overall doesn't acquire any new wealth". Well, the US acquired an awful lot of new wealth from its overseas clients. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 21:49, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::I know you were — I wasn't attempting to address your response. Just supplying a link that I should have supplied at the start. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 21:53, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::Ah, many apologies. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 17:45, 11 May 2015 (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) |
|||
::Give you another example. Some thing that the US did right in the 1930's was to concentrate on infrastructure. For instance, they build the [[Hoover Dam]] that could produce far more electrical power than there was demand for at the time. The industrialists built far more aluminium smelting capacity than there was demand for at the time. Yet, come the time the US entered the second world war, loads of aluminium could be produced because the 'US" had the capacity and electrical power. The 'excess profits tax' enabled other business to turn that aluminium into war machines. To do that, they needed machine tools. That stimulated another manufacturing sector. All those machine tools needed operators. That created a skilled work force, which come peace-time, could produce oodles of consumer items at an affordable price. It is an economic growth principle, that some resent politicians in the last few decades, prefer to ignore. The UK (which did not have the mineral resources of the US) created the National Health Service. That diverted money into bring sick people back to health so that they could once more contribute to the economy. So in answer to the OP. It wasn't the war ''per-se'' but the change in fiscal policy and taxation. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it . It is the thee-generation-cycle thing that is before our eyes. The US is now back in the past agin, where a few have loads and the rest have very little and is thus no longer the major power on the world stage. The nation is once again staved of working capital to keep it a head of everyone else.--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] ([[User talk:Aspro|talk]]) 21:56, 10 May 2015 (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) |
|||
*Easy, {{U|Alansplodge}}, see [[Rationing_in_the_United_Kingdom#Post-World_War_II]]:<blockquote>On 8 May 1945 the Second World War ended in Europe, but rationing continued. Some aspects of rationing became stricter for some years after the war. At the time this was presented as needed to feed people in European areas under British control, whose economies had been devastated by the fighting.[2] This was partly true, but with many British men still mobilised in the armed forces, an austere economic climate, ''and a centrally-planned economy under the post-war Labour government'', [italics mine] resources were not available to expand food production and food imports. Frequent strikes by some workers (most critically dock workers) made things worse.[2] A common ration book fraud was the ration books of the dead being kept and used by the living.</blockquote>As opposed to this, the US demobilised, ended rationing, and cut government spending drastically. In the US people went back to work for themselves and in the UK they kept working . . . for [[Clement Atlee]]. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 22:08, 10 May 2015 (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) |
|||
::Err... Just don't understand that last comment. The US spent less of its GNP on the war than the UK did. It could afford to bounce back instantly. Also, the fiscal changes left it more prosperous than before the US entered the war. They did not have to suffer a balance of trade deficit created by importing oil and minerals (lead , copper, aluminium, tungsten, vanadium, chrome etc.) – the US had those raw materials in its own back yard .--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] ([[User talk:Aspro|talk]]) 22:33, 10 May 2015 (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 == |
|||
::::Because life would be boring without her...--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] ([[User talk:Aspro|talk]]) 22:53, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::: Boredom is an insult to oneself. No second parties are required to rescue us from our own self-abasement. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<span style="font-size:85%"><font face="Verdana" ><sup>[pleasantries]</sup></font></span>]] 23:08, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::<small>Ah, but I am lazy. Medeis rescues my from boredom without me having to put in any effort to do it myself.--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] ([[User talk:Aspro|talk]]) 01:16, 11 May 2015 (UTC)</small> |
|||
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) |
|||
:The premise of the question is flawed. The [[Great Depression in the United States]] consisted of two recessionary events, a recession of unparalleled severity from 1929 to 1933, followed by the severe [[Recession of 1937–38]]. It was ended by a combination of fiscal and monetary stimulus (i.e., the federal government spent more money, and the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates while the administration engineered inflation). Although World War II caused a further drop in unemployment, that was in the context of an economy that was already in recovery. [[User:John M Baker|John M Baker]] ([[User talk:John M Baker|talk]]) 11:22, 11 May 2015 (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. --[[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 == |
|||
::Hate to say it but JMB is right. Think of it into days terms of Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae. Pension companies ''et al'' (the places were ''our wealth'' is invested) have taken a big hit. It was the same in the 1930's. The wealth of the country ended up in the hands of the few after the big Wall Street crash. By the 1940's that debt due to 1920's speculation had been absorb by the average Joe (by reducing his standard of living for many a year). Faced with War, that wealth -held by the few- had to be released quickly back into the economy. The federal government did this. After the war McCarthy tried to establish the old order but was finally over-ruled and the US went on to experience the American Dream of 1957. I.E., Full employment, upward mobility and everything else that the US prided it-self upon. Now we are back to the simple dualism of the 1930's, some 'have' because they are worthy- most other don't because they are just lazy. Just as it was mooted in the 1930's: ''If you want us (the rich) to work harder -then pay us more.. Don't we deserve more money because we know how to make the poor work harder -by paying them less. – Aren't we smarter and therefore worthy of more and more cash!'' That diverts billions of dollars of <u>working capital</u> into company jets, luxury yachts, big 60 room homes with three swimming pools and dozens of domestic servants etc. But what should they care, they only live for today. </rant> So in answer to the OP's question – it was the big change in fiscal policy.--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] ([[User talk:Aspro|talk]]) 18:13, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
[[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? |
|||
:::Hate to say it, but you haven't given a reference for this, Aspro. Most of the New Deal programs were cut/ended with the advent of WWII and FDR's taxes were cut when it ended. [http://fee.org/freeman/detail/37-if-fdrs-new-deal-didnt-end-the-depression-then-it-was-world-war-ii-that-did]. In 1946 Americans went back to work in private sector jobs and had babies. As noted above, Britons (when I quoted verbatim from WP and got hysterically attacked) elected Atlee and continued central planning and the nationalization of industry and austerity as a chosen policy. From that point til Thatcher, if Britons in labour jobs and large swathes of other sectors wanted a raise they had to go on strike against the government. Regardless of the usual Leftist screaming, sexist name calling, and desire for those who disagree with the party line to be jailed, it's quite clear that American private industry not only ended the depression (caused by Hawley Smoot and the Fed Reserve stock market bubble) the European welfare state was made possible by US military subsidies to NATO. Now if you like Soviet communism and austerity for Atlees sake, you can just say so, you don't need to make up nicknames for me. You don't have to argue with me. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 01:45, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::<small>Perhaps Barack Obama would like to hear from you. Since you are the font of all knowledge that will lead his administration and the US back into the golden age – or maybe not. </small>--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] ([[User talk:Aspro|talk]]) 23:17, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
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|-- Verbarson ]] <sup>[[User talk:Verbarson|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Verbarson|edits]]</sub></span> 13:48, 1 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
== Groundhog Day in Punxsutawney == |
|||
: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;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 14:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
Where does the "official" celebration stuff happen: is it somewhere on the Punxsutawney town square and/or somewhere nearby, or is it out at Gobbler's Knob? The knob itself is in [[Bell Township, Jefferson County, Pennsylvania|Bell Township]], not in Punxsutawney proper; I'd like to use [[:File:Groundhogday2005.jpg]] to illustrate the township article, but of course I won't if the scene's within the borough boundaries. I've heard of the knob plenty of times, and the [[Punxsutawney Phil]] article says that he emerges from his home on the knob, but I'm not clear whether he "emerges" by being taken into town, and anyway the film (yes, I know it's fictional :-) definitely sets it on the town square. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 19:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::It would also be odd to call it a "London blaze". --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 15:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:[http://www.groundhog.org/ Here] is the official website of both the town of Punxsutawney and all of the events surrounding the Groundhog Day celebrations. There's maps and lists of events and dates and locations and whatnot. I'm sure if anywhere has the information you seek, it would be there. Furthermore, there's contact information on that website. If you can't find it yourself, the people best to contact would be someone there. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 20:39, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::I had looked over that page already, but I completely missed the maps. Turns out I was wrong — it's not in Punxsutawney or Bell Township, because they don't have it at the site marked as Gobblers Knob on the USGS topo maps. Thanks for the help! [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 20:57, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::The closest I found was the [[1861 Tooley Street fire]]. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 16:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
== Myth of Polish cavalry charging German tanks with lance and sabre during WWII... == |
|||
::::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) |
|||
I'm well aware this this never actually happened (although I was actually taught it as fact in history lessons at school!). However, is it true that for many years, a lot of people in Poland thought that is was true too and that they even turned it into a matter of national pride and an example of the bravery and resolve of the Polish people - something like their own [[Charge of the Light Brigade]]? I was told this recently by someone who had worked in Poland. |
|||
::{{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|-- Verbarson ]] <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;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 07:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::Oh, the poor ducks. --[[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|-- Verbarson ]] <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;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[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|-- Verbarson ]] <sup>[[User talk:Verbarson|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Verbarson|edits]]</sub></span> 19:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
FWIW, when I was told about it in school, it was presented as an example of Polish heroism in the face of overwhelming odds. --[[User:Kurt Shaped Box|Kurt Shaped Box]] ([[User talk:Kurt Shaped Box|talk]]) 22:22, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
= January 4 = |
|||
: I remember reading about the Polish sabre charge in the Guinness Book of Records. I'm not sure whether they were referring to the [[Battle of Krasnobród]] or the [[Battle of Schoenfeld]]. What is the charge you say "never actually happened"? See [[cavalry charge]]. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<span style="font-size:85%"><font face="Verdana" ><sup>[pleasantries]</sup></font></span>]] 22:58, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Could the Sack of [[Jericho]] be almost == |
|||
::AFAIK, there was a Polish sabre charge against a German *troop column*, I believe - which was very successful. But then they were forced to retreat when the panzers arrived. This was later spun by the Nazis into a 'the Poles launched a direct cavalry charge against our tanks', 'this is how stupid they are'/'how willing their generals are to send their men to their deaths' narrative for propaganda purposes. Which was largely believed for decades afterwards. --[[User:Kurt Shaped Box|Kurt Shaped Box]] ([[User talk:Kurt Shaped Box|talk]]) 23:06, 10 May 2015 (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) |
|||
:::We have [[Charge at Krojanty]] and [[Polish cavalry#Cavalry charges and propaganda]]. -- [[User talk:Thinking of England|ToE]] 23:53, 10 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
: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. --[[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'll try to look for some sources, but for now I can give you my personal opinion that this story, whatever its actual veracity, does play nicely into a Polish self-stereotype of a quixotic romantic ready to attack the sun with a hoe (as a Polish saying goes). The [[Warsaw Uprising]] is a pretty good real-life example of this attitude, but it's just one in a long string of Polish "moral victories" (which were exact opposites of actual victories) over the last 250 years. And as the [[Smolensk air crash]] shows, if you can't have a good tragic defeat at the hands of a treacherous, overwhelmingly stronger enemy, you've got to make one up. — [[User:Kpalion|Kpalion]]<sup>[[User talk:Kpalion|(talk)]]</sup> 13:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
: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 known 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) |
|||
= May 11 = |
|||
==Accessibility, for URLs in text document== |
|||
== How did the Portuguese get hold of Northern Brazil Amazon Forest but not the British, the French or others? == |
|||
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? --[[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. --[[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. --[[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;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[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.) --[[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”}}]], 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? --[[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) |
|||
How did the Portuguese Empire get hold of Northern Brazil which is a large area of the Amazon Forest? Did the British, the Dutch and the French try to take Northern Brazil from the Brazilian Portuguese before? [[Special:Contributions/173.33.183.141|173.33.183.141]] ([[User talk:173.33.183.141|talk]]) 04:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
*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) |
|||
**{{replyto|Drmies}} Under its default setting my screen reader does read out the hyphens, but I have my punctuation set lower than normal because I don't like hearing too much information so it doesn't for me. The other major Windows screen reader, [[NonVisual Desktop Access|NVDA]], also reads them out by default. [[User:Graham87|Graham87]] ([[User talk:Graham87|talk]]) 01:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
***Thanks [[User:Graham87|Graham87]]--I appreciate your expertise. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 01:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
***:As recently discussed on the Help or Teahouse desk, a date or other range should ''technically'' use an unspaced [[En Dash]], not a hyphen (according to most manuals of style, including our own), but I doubt that screen readers would notice the difference. {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]]) 08:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
= January 5 = |
|||
:The Portuguese actually got an early start during the [[Age of Exploration]]. See [[Henry the Navigator]] for some background on why this happened. As far as nobody else later taking it away from them, that might precipitate a broader European war, since there were many entangling alliances. And while there was still open land that could easily be claimed in the Americas, risking war would seem like a foolish option. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 04:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::The answer to your question is "yes", somebody else indeed try to take it away from them: please see the [[Dutch Brazil]] article. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 05:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== How to search for awkwardly named topics == |
|||
:[[Timeline_of_Amazon_history]] and [[Amazonas_(Brazilian_state)]] history section has some info. It seems even the Irish had a go at colonizing over there. [[User:DanielDemaret|Star Lord - 星王]] ([[User talk:DanielDemaret|talk]]) 07:43, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::British acquisitions on mainland South America were limited to [[British Guiana]]. Establishing a useful colony from scratch in such an inhospitable place was expensive and dangerous. The British acquired their colony from the Netherlands during the Napoleonic Wars and held on to it by means of the [[Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1814]]. Thereafter it was developed for sugar production by slave labour. The only possible use for rain forest would be for logging tropical hardwood and the British already had as much of that as they could use in [[British Honduras]] (now [[Belize]]). [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 18:12, 11 May 2015 (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 |
|||
::: Not only there are hardwoods, but precious minerals could be found there. The British Empire was the most powerful empire back 200 years ago and they could have taken Northern Brazil if they want to. Right? [[Special:Contributions/173.33.183.141|173.33.183.141]] ([[User talk:173.33.183.141|talk]]) 01:40, 12 May 2015 (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) |
|||
::::Not really. The British Empire had a sizable fleet, but was stretched to its administrative limit managing the entire Empire as it was, also it had no reason to impose itself upon the territory of it's historically [[Anglo-Portuguese Alliance|strongest ally]]. Seriously, there's no reason Britain would ever want to invade and take Brazil. It had no means to do so anyways, but even if it did have the means, it had no reason to. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 01:49, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Do any of the articles listed at [[Unionism]] help? [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 14:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:Brazil became independence from Portugal in 1822. That would mean Brazil had nothing to do with Portugal, and Brazil was not an English ally anymore because it was a free country like the United States. The British could invade and take some lands from Brazil if they want to. Am I right? [[Special:Contributions/173.33.183.141|173.33.183.141]] ([[User talk:173.33.183.141|talk]]) 02:52, 13 May 2015 (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"]}}], most hits will not be about a specific instance. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 14:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
= January 6 = |
|||
:::No, Brazilian independence doesn't mean "they had nothing to do with Portugal", anymore than the granting of Dominion status to Canada would mean that the U.K. "had nothing to do with Canada" anymore. You can be damned sure that if, say, Portugal invaded Canada the UK would have a whole shitload of very angry words to say about. Read up on the process of Brazilian independence, and you'll learn some of the nuances of history. Or don't, and keep saying silly things that have no connection to the realities of history. Makes no difference to me. If you want to actually be educated, we have tons of articles on the topic. Start with [[Transfer of the Portuguese Court to Brazil]], and follow on through [[Brazil–Portugal relations]] to understand the modern perspective, and try to see if Portugal would have turned a blind eye to their historically strongest ally (Britain) invading their largest former colony with whom they also enjoyed a strong bond. Or, you can continue to argue asinine ideas from a place of ignorance. Makes no difference to me. I've done my best to provide you with places to educate yourself. You do what you want. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 00:48, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== What does the [[Thawabit]] consist of? == |
|||
::They certainly could have tried. I would have expected a protracted jungle war leading to their eventual defeat, much like the French (and later Americans) in Indochina. It's just too much land, in too different of a climate, and too far away, for them to do very well. Of course, they did manage to conquer India, but that was many little kingdoms when they arrived, not a united nation fighting against them. |
|||
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) |
|||
*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". --[[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] --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
== Does BPM Need To Cite Source == |
|||
:::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. --[[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? --[[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. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 00:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
= January 7 = |
|||
I edited the article for the song [[Leave Me Alone]] by Michael Jackson. The article stated that the song's tempo is 112 BPM when in reality the song is at 124 BPM. I don't have any source to site, but this information is self-evident when listening to the song. Is it alright not to have a source to cite in this case or no? This is my first (and perhaps my last) time editing on wikipedia so I'm not exactly sure what I'm doing. I'm not even sure if this is the right place to be asking this question or if I should have posted this on the talk page for that article, so please forgive me if I'm going about this the wrong way and making an ass out of myself. |
|||
Thanks, |
|||
--[[User:ElGimoni|ElGimoni]] ([[User talk:ElGimoni|talk]]) 04:53, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Is there such a thing as a joke type index? == |
|||
:In this case the problem is that the article ''already'' cites a source for the tempo, and that source says it's 112. So by just changing the number and leaving the reference unchanged, you are claiming that the source says it's 124. If you had another source that said it was 124, you could cite that source and mention the conflicting information. But you say you know the tempo from listening to the song, and that's not a citeable source. I suggest changing the number back to 112 but [[Template:dubious|flagging it <code><nowiki>{{dubious}}</nowiki></code>]], and explaining on the talk page how it's obvious. (I'd do that myself, but I'm not familiar with the song, so I don't think it's appropriate for me to do it.) |
|||
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) |
|||
:AI generated jokes have been around for years. Just Google for it. They range from weird to meh. [[User:Shantavira|Shantavira]]|[[User talk:Shantavira|<sup>feed me</sup>]] 10:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Gershon Legman]] made an attempt of sorts in his two joke collections, but it was kind of a half-assed approach: there are a bunch of indices printed on pages, but no key tying them together per se. His interest was in the core of the subject of the joke, so he might have said, for example, that ''these'' jokes were all based on unresolved Oedipal drives while ''those'' jokes were based on hatred of the mother (he was a capital "F" Freudian). The link Bugs shared is more about the formats of the jokes themselves, though some are also differentiated by their subject (albeit in a more superficial way than Legman attempted). [[User:Matt Deres|Matt Deres]] ([[User talk:Matt Deres|talk]]) 21:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Arthur Koestler]] has attempted to develop a theory of humour (as well as art and discovery), first in ''Insight and Outlook'' (1949) and slightly elaborated further in ''[[The Act of Creation]]'' (1964). He did, however, not develop a typology of jokes. IMO [[Victor Raskin]]'s [[Theories of humor#Script-based semantic theory of humor|script-based semantic theory of humor]] presented in ''Semantic Mechanisms of Humor'' (1985) is essentially the same as Koestler's, but Raskin does not reference Koestler in the book. For an extensive overview of theories of humour see [https://www.oalib.com/research/2052736 Contemporary Linguistic Theories of Humour]. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 00:51, 9 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
: The Humanities desk is probably not the best place for this discussion. In decreasing order I'd say the article's Talk page, or if you feel this specific problem brings up more general issues about editing Wikipedia you could go to the [[Wikipedia:Help desk|Help Desk]], or if, for some reason, you must come to the Reference Desk your best shot is the [[Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Entertainment|Entertainment desk]]. <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 17:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
= January 8 = |
|||
== Tobruk (Movie 1967) == |
|||
== ''The Nest'' magazine, UK, 1920s == |
|||
Can anyone identify the German tanks in the film Tobruk, starring Rock Hudson? I watched it last night, and was bewildered to see German tanks that were shaped more like 1960s US tanks, such as the [[M46 Patton]], just painted with German insignia. Also, throughout the film, they only use one type, so there is no need to watch the entire two-hour movie. <span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml"><font face="MV Boli" color="blue">[[User:KageTora|KägeTorä - (<sup>影</sup><sub>虎</sub>)]] ([[User talk:KageTora|もしもし!]])</font></span> 05:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
I have a copy of {{cite book | title = The Grocer's Window Book | year = 1922 | location = London | publisher = The Nest Magazine }}, "arranged by The Editor of ''The Nest''". The address of ''The Nest'' Magazine is given as 15 Arthur Street, London, EC4. It contains suggestions for arranging window displays in an attractive manner to attract customers into independent grocer's shops. I would be interested to know more about ''The Nest''. I suspect it may have something to do with Nestles Milk, as 1) the back cover is a full-page advertisement for Nestles and Ideal Milk, and there are several other adverts for Nestles products in the book, and 2) one of the suggested window displays involves spelling out "IDEAL" with tins of Ideal Milk. Thank you, [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 02:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::Just read the article about [[Tobruk (1967 film)]], and the article says the Italian tanks are played by [[M48 Patton]]s, so I was close. The article makes no mention of the German tanks, but I expect they are the same. Also, the German half-track was also an American one, which I also thought was odd. Still, I guess that the people who went to see Rock Hudson films were hardly military hardware geeks. <span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml"><font face="MV Boli" color="blue">[[User:KageTora|KägeTorä - (<sup>影</sup><sub>虎</sub>)]] ([[User talk:KageTora|もしもし!]])</font></span> 05:41, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:{{Tq|Nest, 1922. M.—1st. 6d. Nestle and Anglo-Swiss Condensed Milk Co., 15 Arthur Street, E.c.4}}[https://archive.org/details/willings-press-guide-and-advertisers-directory-and-handbook-49/page/130/mode/1up?q=nest+%2215+Arthur+Street%22] according to ''Willing's press guide and advertisers directory and handbook.'' I also found it in ''The Newspaper press directory and advertisers' guide,'' which merely confirms the address and the price of sixpence. Both of these were for the year 1922, which suggests to me that the magazine might not have survived into 1923. M signifies monthly, and 1st probably means published on the 1st of the month. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 19:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
{{Resolved}} |
|||
== Historical U.S. population data by age (year 1968) == |
|||
:::After watching RH crash through the barbed wire with a stolen tank at around the 1:29 mark on Youtube, it certainly looks like an M-48. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 09:34, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
In the year 1968, what percentage of the United States population was under 25 years old? I am wondering about this because I am watching the movie [[Wild in the Streets]], and want to know if a percentage claimed in the film was pulled out of a hat or was based in fact. [[Special:Contributions/2601:18A:C500:E830:CE4:140C:29E5:594F|2601:18A:C500:E830:CE4:140C:29E5:594F]] ([[User talk:2601:18A:C500:E830:CE4:140C:29E5:594F|talk]]) 04:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::::Other equipment in the film includes [[M3 Half-track]]s imitating the [[Sd.Kfz. 251]] and a [[Grumman Albatross]] masquerading as a German flying boat. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 18:26, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:What percentage did they give? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 05:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::52% (it's on the movie poster). [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 16:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:Tabel No. 6 in the [http://www2.census.gov/prod2/statcomp/documents/1971-02.pdf 1971 US Census Report] (p. 8) gives, for 1960, {{val|80093}} Kpeople age 0–24 on a total population of {{val|180007}} Kpeople, corresponding to 44.5%, and, for 1970, {{val|94095}} Kpeople age 0–24 on a total population of {{val|204265}} Kpeople, corresponding to 46.1%. Interpolation results in an estimate of 45.8% for 1968. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 12:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::{{small|Who are Kpeople? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 23:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}} |
|||
:::Reverse engineering and a spot of maths: k = kilo = 1 000 = 1 thousand. [[User:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM]] ([[User talk:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|talk]]) 10:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{small|So, Kpeople means 1 thousandpeople. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 18:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC)}} |
|||
== Countries with greatest land mass == |
|||
:I suspect that WW2 films made right after the end of the war would have had better access to working German and Italian tanks. Later films then had the choice of using other tanks, or constructing new mock-ups of Axis tanks, at great expenses, so this was probably only done in big-budget productions. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 19:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::I can't recall any early war films that use real Axis tanks, but I may be wrong about that. Certainly by the 1960s, Hollywood films are using current US tanks as stand-ins, notably in [[Battle of the Bulge (film)|''Battle of the Bulge'']] (1965) with huge fleets of tanks; [[M47 Patton]]s representing the Germans and [[M24 Chaffee]]s representing the Americans. [[Patton (film)|''Patton'']] (1970) has lots of M48s. In ''[[Saving Private Ryan]]'' more realism was required and an ex-Soviet [[T-34]] was convincingly turned into a [[Tiger I]]. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 21:33, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Can someone please fill in these blanks? Thank you. |
|||
:::[[Sieg im Westen|You're wrong about that.]][http://imagehost.epier.com/130478/siegimwesten01.jpg] [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 07:27, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
1. Currently, the USA ranks as number _____ among countries with the greatest land mass. |
|||
== Flag of [[Memelland]] == |
|||
2. If the USA were to "annex" or "acquire" both Canada and Greenland, the USA would rank as number _____ among countries with the greatest land mass. |
|||
[[Image:Flag of Memelland.png|thumb|right|300px|Historical flag of the Memelland from 1919 to 1924 and ''[[de facto]]'' until 1939.]] |
|||
Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 05:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
[[Image:Coat of arms of Klaipeda (Lithuania).png|thumb|right|Current coat of arms of Klaipėda.]] |
|||
:See [[List of countries and dependencies by area]], which gives a nuanced answer to your first question, and the answer to your second question is obvious from the data in the article.-[[User:Gadfium|Gadfium]] ([[User talk:Gadfium|talk]]) 05:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:4 and 1. But the chance of Trump to annex Canada is close to zero. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::Also the US somehow annexing Greenland is infinitely improbable. It's part of the European Union. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 12:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:::Trump's presidential term is four years and the process of discussion would take longer than that. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 14:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:::No it isn't. [[User:Tamfang|—Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 00:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes it is effectively: [[Greenland and the European Union]] says "all citizens of the Realm of Denmark residing in Greenland (Greenlandic nationals) are EU citizens". [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 14:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::::But Denmark is a NATO member. The US invading Greenland will trigger [[NATO Article 5]]. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 11:14, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Also, US is a member of NATO. The situation will be very complicated. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 11:37, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
= January 11 = |
|||
What's that on the sides of the seal ? |
|||
==JeJu AirFlight 2216 == |
|||
They are described as either wooden scaffolding (doesn't look like it to me) or "wharf elements" here: [https://flagspot.net/flags/de-me920.html]. Does anyone have a photo of either that resembles the seal ? [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 12:44, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Is this the beginning of a new conspiracy theory? |
|||
On 11 January, the Aviation and Railway Accident Investigation Board stated that both the CVR and FDR had stopped recording four minutes before the aircraft crashed.[79] |
|||
Why would the flight recorder stop recording after the bird strike? Don't they have backup battery for flight recorders? |
|||
: If "wharf elements" is correct then I'd guess they are stylized images of a [https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=wharf+crane&rlz=1C1CHFX_en-GBGB548GB548&espv=2&biw=1316&bih=894&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=K6lQVc3FFcaP7AabtIGgAg&sqi=2&ved=0CCAQsAQ&dpr=1 wharf crane]. That search gives mostly modern images, but I found an older picture [http://whitmans-brooklyn.org/portfolio/navy-yard-dry-dock-works/ here] that has a device that vaguely resembles those on the flag. [[User:AndrewWTaylor|AndrewWTaylor]] ([[User talk:AndrewWTaylor|talk]]) 13:13, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
[[User:Ohanian|Ohanian]] ([[User talk:Ohanian|talk]]) 09:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:Do you mean JeJu Air Flight 2216? [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 14:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::There are more images of the seal at [[Coat of arms of Klaipėda]]. Reading our article on [[Memel Castle]], the castle was originally "wooden, protected by a tower". Could the scaffold bits represent wooden structures that were part of the castle? [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 13:28, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:: |
::Yes, you are right, flight 2216 not 2219. I have updated the title. [[User:Ohanian|Ohanian]] ([[User talk:Ohanian|talk]]) 14:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
||
It says on wikipedia that "With the reduced power requirements of solid-state recorders, it is now practical to incorporate a battery in the units, so that recording can continue until flight termination, even if the aircraft electrical system fails. ". So how can the CVR stop recording the pilot's voices??? [[User:Ohanian|Ohanian]] ([[User talk:Ohanian|talk]]) 10:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::An article on GenWiki [http://wiki-en.genealogy.net/Memel#Municipal_Coat_of_Arms here] says they are "wooden marker buoys (as in Bommelsvitte and "Galgenbake" in Schmelz).". [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 13:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:The aircraft type was launched in 1994, this particular aircraft entered service in 2009. It may have had an older type of recorder. |
|||
== First Amazon bridge == |
|||
:I too am puzzled by some aspects of this crash, but I'm sure the investigators will enlighten us when they're ready. [[User:PiusImpavidus|PiusImpavidus]] ([[User talk:PiusImpavidus|talk]]) 11:41, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::Having looked into this briefly, it sounds like an independent power supply for the CVR (generally called a Recorder Independent Power Supply/RIPS) was only mandated for aircraft manufacturer from 2010 in the US [//www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-G/part-121/subpart-K/section-121.359] [//www.pprune.org/11803679-post1676.html]. I doubt anyone else required them before. [//www.easa.europa.eu/bg/downloads/46032/en] So not particularly surprising if this aircraft didn't have one. I think, but am not sure, that even in the US older aircraft aren't required to be retrofitted with these newer recorders. (See e.g. [//downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2023-2270-0107/attachment_1.pdf] [//www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_20-186.pdf] [//www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/20-186A.pdf].) In fact, the only regulator I could find with such a mandate is the Canadian one and that isn't until 2026 at the earliest [//www.midcanadamod.com/sales-service-support/be-ready-for-the-new-canadian-cvr-rips-mandate/]. Of course even if the FAA did require it, it's a moot point unless it was required for any aircraft flying to the US and this aircraft was flying to the US. I doubt it was required in South Korea given that it doesn't seem to be required in that many other places. There is a lot of confusing discussion about what the backup system if any on this aircraft would have been like [//www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1hyozsq/update_jeju_air_2216s_both_cvr_fdr_stopped/] [//www.reddit.com/r/korea/comments/1hyst0g/jeju_air_an_expert_weighs_in_on_the_missing_last/] [//www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls/663324-jeju-737-800-crash-muan-airport-south-korea-85.html]. The most I gathered from these discussions is that because the aircraft was such an old design where nearly everything was mechanical, a backup power supply wasn't particularly important in its design. The only expert commentary in RS I could find was in Reuters [//www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-korea-jeju-air-jet-blackboxes-stopped-recording-4-minutes-before-crash-2025-01-11/] "{{tqi|a former transport ministry accident investigator, said the discovery of the missing data from the budget airline's Boeing 737-800 jet's crucial final minutes was surprising and suggests all power, including backup, may have been cut, which is rare.}}" Note that the RIPS only have to work for 10 minutes, I think the timeline of this suggests power should not have been lost for 10 minutes at the 4 minutes point, but it's not something I looked in to. BTW, I think this is sort of explained in some of the other sources but if not see [//www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/18lteps/why_doesnt_the_faaeasa_require_that_cvrs_and_fdrs/]. Having a RIPS is a little more complicated than just having a box with a battery. There's no point recording nothing so you need to ensure that the RIPS is connected to/powering mics in the cabin. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 01:28, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:The aircraft made 13 flights in 48 hours, meaning less than 3.7 hours per flight. Is it too much? Its last flight from Bangkok to Korea had a normal flight time for slightly more than 5 hours. Does it mean the pilots had to rush through preflight checks? [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 15:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:With this kind of schedule, it is questionable that the aircraft is well-maintained. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 15:32, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
The OP seems to be obsessed with creating a new conspiracy theory out of very little real information, and even less expertise. Perhaps a new hobby is in order? [[User:DOR (HK)|DOR (ex-HK)]] ([[User talk:DOR (HK)|talk]]) 19:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
Just for info, the article is [[Jeju Air Flight 2216]]. This question has not yet been raised at the Talk page there. Thanks. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 19:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
Upon its completion a few years ago, the [[Rio Negro Bridge]] was heralded as the first bridge anywhere in the Amazon system. How could this be the case? There aren't a ton of roads in the far western parts of the system, but Google Maps shows some that cross rivers; there's a big one on a national highway at the Ecuadorian provincial capital of [[Puerto Francisco de Orellana]], a [[cable-stayed bridge]] ([[:File:Vista nocturna de Francisco de Orellana.jpg|picture]]; approximately {{coord|0|28|20|S|76|58|46|W}}) over the [[Río Napo]], and [https://books.google.com/books?id=Gh0QwhOSCtgC&pg=PA134&lpg=PA134&dq=%22Puerto+Francisco+de+Orellana%22+bridge&source=bl&ots=oHFp1Zk3xm&sig=aYd95Zw0TjYyJ74WHm-nd94ht2k&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-bNQVb28J4GENo-OgeAK&ved=0CEAQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=%22Puerto%20Francisco%20de%20Orellana%22%20bridge&f=false this book], which predates the Rio Negro bridge by several years, mentions the Napo bridge as already being in place. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 14:06, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Do you have a link to a source making the claim for the Rio Negro Bridge? If we can all read it, maybe we can parse it for what it is saying. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 14:23, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::[http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jul/29/manaus-bridge-amazon-rainforest Example], but that's just one thing; it was all through the press when it opened, and I'm sure you could find lots of different statements. I'm running on memory here. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 14:34, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::Well, then the statement made by that article is wrong. Plain and simple. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 14:40, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::Yes, but what about the tons of other sources that said the same thing? It's got to be a more nuanced situation than "well, duhh, it's wrong". [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 23:13, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Yeah, the nuance is "the first source got it wrong, and the error permeated through the other sources because lazy journalism." If you have evidence it's blatantly wrong, then it is blatantly wrong. Things continue to be wrong even if lots of people keep repeating its wrongness. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 23:41, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::: What was the first source? The Guardian's source seems to be [http://www.skyscrapercity.com/ this]. Hardly a reliable source a Guardian article ought to refer to, to begin with, at least if you care to ask me. Amusingly the Guardian amended one bit of info in this 05/08/2010 article ("This article was amended on 6 August 2010. The original stated that the Manaus-Iranduba bridge is the longest in Brazil. This has been corrected."). Obviously they take accuracy in reporting very very seriously. {{P}} <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 00:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::If you look at the forum, the only thing I noticed where the claim could originate from is [http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1029099&page=3] where someone said "Very impressive ! The only bridge on Amazon. ". In the very next post someone else says "Actually, the bridge is not over the Amazon River itself, but over the Negro River, an affluent, which merges with Amazon ~5km downstream from the bridge." This person doesn't actually say that there are other bridges, but they also don't say there are none so can't be said to support the statement. So if the Guardian is really relying solely on someone making a unclear and potentially misleading statement (depending on how you interpret "on Amazon"), it's even worse than simply relying on a forum post. I wonder if the person is partly right. Is there any bridge on the [[Amazon River]] itself? (It may depend on what you mean by the Amazon, since as our article mentions, definitions vary.) There is some talk in page 6 of that forum of building a bridge over the Amazon itself. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 12:29, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:...nor should it be, per [[WP:TALK]]. [[User:Shantavira|Shantavira]]|[[User talk:Shantavira|<sup>feed me</sup>]] 10:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
== Cartoon Character == |
|||
::I disagree. It's quite a critical aspect in the investigation of the accident. Not sure it's some kind of "conspiracy", however. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 10:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:::But I suggest it should only be raised if, and to the extent that, it is mentioned in [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|Reliable sources]], not [[Wikipedia:No original research|OR]] speculated about by/in the Wikipedia article or (at length) the Talk page. On the Talk page it might be appropriate to ask if there ''are'' Reliable sources discussing it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.8.29.20|94.8.29.20]] ([[User talk:94.8.29.20|talk]]) 10:53, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::::Quite. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 10:54, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::::Have now posed the question there. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 12:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
== Fortune 500 == |
|||
I remember from maybe 50 years ago a cartoon character named "Dgeaux Bleaux," a satirical spelling of "Joe Blow." I thought Al Capp created Dgeaux Bleaux, but I have checked with his historians and his records and do not find this character. I have facetiously used the first name occasionally in place of my own name, "Joe." Do you have any record of this character? |
|||
Is there any site where one can view complete Fortune 500 and Fortune Global 500 for free? These indices are so widely used so is there such a site? --[[User:40bus|40bus]] ([[User talk:40bus|talk]]) 20:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
JP Allryze <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.196.128.177|142.196.128.177]] ([[User talk:142.196.128.177|talk]]) 15:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:I can't find any record of the character on the interwebz. But it would not be impossible. The use of "-eaux" in place of the "oh" sound in English words is often used to humorous effect as a means of representing "pseudo-French" language. The best example I can think of is the [[LSU Tigers]] which use [[Geaux Tigers]] as a motto; LSU being Louisiana State University, and Louisiana being home to many French-speaking [[Cajun]]s. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 15:48, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::<small>... and for some, the [http://gatorsfirst.spreadshirt.com/tigers-bleaux-tee-A8159150 Tigers Bleaux], naturally.</small> ''Jos Bleau'' appears to be a [[Quebec French|Québécois French]] version of Joe Blow (see the Canada section in our article on [[John_Q._Public#Other_English-speaking_countries|John Q. Public]], or the French WP article on [[:fr:Homme_de_la_rue|''homme de la rue'']], e.g.), but I wasn't able to locate a cartoon character named "Dgeaux Bleaux" (or Djeau/Djeaux Bleau/Bleaux, ...) ---[[User:Sluzzelin|Sluzzelin]] [[User talk:Sluzzelin|<small>talk</small>]] 16:36, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
: |
:You can view the complete list here: https://fortune.com/ranking/global500/ [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 21:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
||
= January 12 = |
|||
*Maybe you're thinking of the Al Capp character [[Joe Btfsplk]]. --[[User:Mareino|M]][[User_talk:Mareino|<font color="orange">@</font>]][[User:Mareino|r]][[Special:Contributions/Mareino|<font color="orange">ē</font>]][[User:Mareino|ino]] 20:51, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== Questions == |
||
# Why did the United Kingdom not seek euro adoption when it was in EU? |
|||
Are there any paintings named '''Jefferson Dreams''' and '''Monument for a Vietnam Shrine'''? If yes, who have painted it? I've Googled a lot and couldn't find an answer. All I know is, this works are related to [[art movement|art movements]]. I found these names from a question paper. So, any help will be much appreciated.--[[User:991joseph|<font color="purple"><font face="Cheddar Jack">Jos</font></font><font color="brown"><font face="Cheddar Jack">eph</font></font>]] 16:43, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
# Why did Russia, Belarus and Ukraine not join EU during Eastern Enlargement in 2004, unlike many other former Eastern Bloc countries? |
|||
# Why is Russia not in NATO? |
|||
# If all African countries are in AU, why are all European countries not in EU? |
|||
# Why Faroe Islands and Greenland have not become sovereign states yet? |
|||
# Can non-sovereign states or country subdivisions have embassies? |
|||
# Why French overseas departments have not become sovereign states yet? --[[User:40bus|40bus]] ([[User talk:40bus|talk]]) 13:35, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
#:I see that [[University College London|UCL]] offer a course on [https://www.ucl.ac.uk/languages-international-education/preparation-courses/upc-foundation/course-information/modern-european-history-politics Modern European History & Politics]. Had you considered that, perhaps? [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 13:43, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
#:# See: [[United Kingdom and the euro]] |
|||
#:# Russia, Belarus and Ukraine do not meet the criteria for joining the European Union |
|||
#:# If you google "Nato's primary purpose", you will know. |
|||
#:# The two do not have logical connection. |
|||
#:# They are too small to be an independent country |
|||
#:# Non-sovereign states or countries, for example Wales and Scotland, are countries within a sovereign state. They don't have embassies of their own. |
|||
#:# Unlike the British territories, all people living in the French territories are fully enfranchised and can vote for the French national assembly, so they are fully represented in the French democracy and do not have the need of becoming a sovereign state. |
|||
#:[[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 15:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:Too many questions all at once… but to address the first with an overly simplistic answer: The British preferred the Pound. It had been one of the strongest currencies in the world for generations, and keeping it was a matter of national pride. [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 14:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
::1. See [[United Kingdom and the euro]] |
|||
:Was it [http://mgu.ac.in/files/BA%20AGD%20S2%20Q.%20Bank%20&%20Model%20Ques.pdf this question paper (p. 11)]? If so, it's the only result that Google is providing for "Monument for a Vietnam Shrine" (the next painting in the question is ''[[Rain, Steam and Speed – The Great Western Railway|Rain, Steam and Speed]]''). [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 18:38, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::2. {{xt|"... geopolitical considerations, such as preserving Russia’s status as a former imperial power, is more important to Moscow than economic issues when it comes to foreign policy. Russia’s sees [in 2004] relations with the EU to be much less important than bilateral relations with the EU member-states that carry the most political weight, namely France, Germany and, to some extent, Britain. Russia thus clearly emphasizes politics over economics. While NATO enlargement was seen by Moscow to be a very important event, Russia barely noticed the enlargement of the EU on May 1."}} [https://carnegieendowment.org/events/2004/05/russia-and-the-european-union?lang=en ''Russia and the European Union'' (May 2004)]. See also [[Russia–European Union relations]]. |
|||
::I found [http://www.virginia.edu/presidentemeritus/presidentsreports/94/Study.html "Study for Jefferson Dreams" (12" x 16")], by Lincoln Perry, an artist for which Wikipedia does not have an article, but he does have a website; [http://lincolnperry.com/ lincolnperry.com]. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 19:52, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::3. See [[Russia–NATO relations]]. |
|||
:: Yeah. That's is the question paper. Thanks for you effort.--[[User:991joseph|<font color="purple"><font face="Cheddar Jack">Jos</font></font><font color="brown"><font face="Cheddar Jack">eph</font></font>]] 07:26, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::[[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 14:10, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
:::The "Vietnam Shrine" painting might be "Reflections", by [[Lee Teter]] (no article) - see [http://www.leeteter.com/website_009.htm this] page on his website. [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] ([[User talk:Tevildo|talk]]) 21:45, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Someone's bored again and expecting us to entertain them. [[User:Nanonic|Nanonic]] ([[User talk:Nanonic|talk]]) 15:59, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
== Hitler at strategy == |
|||
Was Hitler a sophisticated strategist? Or was he more of a mad dog who just ordered his troops to attack?--[[User:Llaanngg|Llaanngg]] ([[User talk:Llaanngg|talk]]) 17:34, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Wehrmacht#Command structure]] is a good place to start your research. Hitler was commander-in-chief of the military, the actual strategic operation of the military was managed by [[Wilhelm Keitel]], leader of the [[Oberkommando der Wehrmacht]], or OKW. Military strategy of Germany during WWII was complex and complicated; the Wehrmacht was officially insulated from the Nazi Party; Wehrmacht officers were forbidden from being members of political parties. I'll leave it to more experts to give better references for Hitler's actual involvement. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 18:17, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:He declared war on the US after the US declared war on Japan, thus opening the door to our entry into the European theater of WWII. How well did ''that'' strategy work out? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 19:10, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::To be fair, most strategists don't consider the U.S. involvement in the European theatre to have been the ''turning point'', ''per se''. The war would have likely dragged on for 2-3 more years, but the [[Eastern Front]] was a lost cause for Hitler and it was a matter of ''when'' rather than ''if'' Germany fell. The numbers bear that out: the [[Western Front (World War II)]] saw a total of about 1,000,000 Axis and 3,000,000 allied casualties. The [[Eastern Front (World War II)]] saw 5,000,000 Axis and 10,000,000 Soviet casualties. U.S. involvement in general, and D-Day specifically, was about ''not letting the Russians conquer all of Germany'' as much as (and perhaps more so) than defeating Germany itself. The Americans were only heavily involved in Europe from about 1943 on, both in the [[Italian Campaign]] and later [[D-Day]]. The Soviets had already softened up Germany pretty well by the time the U.S. had any fighting strength on the ground in Europe to challenge Germany. U.S. involvement was important, don't get me wrong; the U.S. had a major role to play in the outcome of the war in Europe, but it wasn't like without the U.S. Germany would have won the whole war; that seems unlikely. Without the U.S., the [[Iron Curtain]] would have been considerably further West (perhaps as far as the Atlantic Ocean), and THAT was the greater importance of U.S. involvement. Ultimately, if we were to make a claim to Hitler's biggest strategic mistake, it wasn't declaring war on the U.S. in 1941 (since the U.S. were [[Lend-Lease|already supplying the British war effort]] anyway), it was Hitler's decision to violate the [[Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact]]. That was by far his biggest blunder. His major strategic goal was to re-establish the German Empire ("Grossdeutschland") and establish a buffer zone of satellite states to make it defensible. He achieved the first goal with the [[Anschluss]] and [[Munich Agreement]]; the second goal with the subjugation of France and Poland, and his alliances with Italy, Croatia, Hungary, etc. The invasion of Russia was Hitler's biggest mistake, and as Wikipedia's article on [[Operation Barbarossa]] notes, " the largest military operation in world history in both manpower and casualties. Its failure was a turning point in the Third Reich's fortunes." Many would argue it was ''the'' turning point. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 19:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{EC}} Hitler thought of himself as an inspired strategist mainly because he championed a plan devised by [[Erich von Manstein]] and [[Heinz Guderian]] against the advice of his general staff, resulting in a resounding victory in the [[Battle of France]]. The victory might have included the destruction of the [[British Expeditionary Force (World War II)|British Expeditionary Force]], had Hitler not got cold feet and issued the [[Battle of Dunkirk#Hoalt order|"Halt Order"]] on the advice of his staff but against the opinion of von Manstein and Guderian, allowing the British to slip away from Dunkirk. Perhaps because of this, Hitler convinced himself that he was a military genius and became increasingly reluctant to listen to advice, relying instead on his own intuition. Perhaps his worst performance was staking so much on the pointless capture of Stalingrad (probably because it was named after Stalin), and when it was clear that it was unachievable, refusing to allow a breakout. He never really understood the concept of a tactical withdrawal and towards the end of the war was continually ordering last stands, which resulted in huge troop concentrations being encircled and stranded in isolated pockets, the [[Falaise pocket]] being the best known example in the west. The Western Allies forbade any attempt to assassinate Hitler, in case somebody that knew what they were doing took charge. Have a look at [http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/hitler_commander_01.shtml ''Hitler's Leadership Style''] by Dr Geoffrey Megargee and [http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/97-0609h.pdf ''A MILITARY LEADERSHIP ANALYSIS OF ADOLF HITLER''] by Major Paul A. Braunbeck. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 19:36, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::: Many thanks to Alan for providing these. I was a bit disappointed with the second item. What level is the [[Air Command and Staff College]] supposed to be, academically? Four-year college level? <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 19:03, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::[[User:Basemetal]], I had a very cursory scan through it and it seemed to hit some of the salient points. I was working on the principal thet the college wouldn't have published it online if it wasn't any good. 16:25, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::Also, as for US influence on the defeat of Germany, you have to include the critical non-combat role of the US, as the "[[Arsenal of Democracy]]" in arming and supplying the UK, Soviet Union, and other allies. Without this aid the UK and then the war might have been lost. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 19:42, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::Which is why I did exactly that. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 19:45, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::You said "The war would have likely dragged on for 2-3 more years, but the Eastern Front was a lost cause for Hitler and it was a matter of when rather than if Germany fell." I took that to mean you thought that Germany would have lost, even without any US assistance. Is that not what you meant ? [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 14:53, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Pretty much. The USSR was busy letting Hitler stupidly throw the bulk of his army against the impenetrable Russian winter to try, and fail, to [[Battle of Stalingrad|capture a midling industrial city of little strategic importance]]. The USSR received little benefit from Lend-Lease (there was some nominal aid) and was beating Germany through sheer attrition. While twice as many Soviet Soldiers as Germans died along the Eastern front, population-wise the Soviet Union had roughly 4x the population to throw at the war effort as Germany did. They could afford to wait them out. The involvement of the U.S., while vital to keeping Britain in the war and keeping Germany busy in the west, merely accelerated a defeat that was already decided once Hitler invaded Russia. U.S. involvement was vital to the eventual outcome of the war, in terms of what spheres of influence existed within Europe after the war. But there was probably no way that Germany had the means to defeat the U.S.S.R. Had Germany been able to defeat Britain, it would have merely made more territory for the U.S.S.R. to subjugate once it rolled into Berlin. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 19:21, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::We aren't supposed to do counterfactual speculation, but control of an ample oil supply was really the key to victory in World War II. Britain stood between Germany and the oil fields of the Middle East. If Germany had been able to knock out Britain, while keeping the Soviet Union locked temporarily in a stalemate, Germany could have gained control of the oil fields of the Middle East. This need not have been a matter of brute conquest but could have been achieved by diplomacy. (Sell us your oil at a favorable price and we won't attack you.) Turkey would then probably have seized the opportunity to join Germany as an ally, and a strengthened Germany could have turned itself to the defeat of the Soviet Union. With a firm base in the Middle East, Germany could probably have gained control of Azerbaijan, the Soviets' main source of oil at that time. It's not likely that Germany could have conquered Russia, in the sense of occupying and fully subduing it, but Germany could have encouraged the (already somewhat fissile) Soviet republics to break away from Russia, and Russia could have been reduced to virtual economic dependence on Greater Germany. So, while I agree that the Soviet Union did most of the work of defeating Germany, it very likely would not have succeeded without American assistance to Britain. [[User:Marco polo|Marco polo]] ([[User talk:Marco polo|talk]]) 20:02, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Well, except that the [[Battle of Britain]] wasn't really won with American hardware or American forces or American funding. [[Lend-Lease]], and it's precursor, the [[Destroyers for Bases Agreement]], came ''after'' Britain had already defended itself ''by itself'' thank you very much against pretty much everything Germany could throw at it, ''before'' Germany had even opened the Eastern Front. Knowing the chronology here is ''vital'' to understanding the history, and if you're going to present counterfactuals, they should at least be consistent with actual events ''as they happened'' to the point where you take off from history. The ability ''of'' Britain to defend itself against Germany all on its own let the U.S. know it was a ''good investment'', and that's almost exactly WHY the U.S. agreed to supply the Allies with materiel and money. Hitler wouldn't start Operation Barbarossa until 9 months AFTER it had already knew it couldn't take on Britain. Now, ''if'' Hitler had not attacked the U.S.S.R, AND if they had concentrated their entire force on an amphibious attack on Britain, they may have been able to defeat them. But the situation in 1941, on the eve of Pearl Harbor, the die was already cast. Hitler had already abandoned the Western Front to a quiet stalemate, with France under friendly control, and was content to leave his forces in the West to tamp down the [[French Resistance]] and defend the Channel and Atlantic coast passively. He had, by the time the U.S. became actually involved in committing troops in December 1941, already committed the his forces to the Eastern Front in June 1941. The only reasonable counterfactual decision point which results in German victory is ''not attacking the U.S.S.R.'' The three biggest defeats the Germans faced in the entire war were ''all'' against Russia with no meaningful help from the US or UK: the [[Battle of Kursk]], the [[Battle of Moscow]], and the [[Battle of Stalingrad]]. Again, I'm not saying the involvement of the U.S. was not vital to history, not vital to the outcome of the war, etc. But it is more complex and nuanced than "The U.S. saved the world from Hitler!" No, The U.S.S.R saved the world from Hitler. Or more properly: Hitler saved the world from Hitler, because he foolishly attacked the U.S.S.R. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 21:06, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::Had Hitler invaded the USSR properly, such as with full winter equipment, and then bypassed major points of resistance, like Stalingrad, he might have fared a lot better. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 03:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::Yes, the Soviets saved the world from Hitler; it's just too bad they failed to save the world from Stalin. — [[User:Kpalion|Kpalion]]<sup>[[User talk:Kpalion|(talk)]]</sup> 15:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::Yup... --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 16:45, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::Hitler should not have invaded the Soviet Union in the first place. With all that effort to fight a war there saved, he would have had the resources to mass produce jet fighters like the [[Messerschmitt Me 262]], and develop the [[Horten Ho 229]] of which only one prototype was build. Such an air force based on the existing German technology at the time, would have made the allied invasion impossible. The British and US air forces would have been unable to operate over Western Europe, and without any air cover any invasion attempt would have been doomed. |
|||
::::::::::Then without any significant allied attacks on Germany, the Germans would have found it much easier to improve their jet fighters and also their missile program would have progressed much faster. By the mid 1940s, Germany would have been beyond military defeat, because the US would by that time not have been able to deploy nuclear weapons due to a lack of a delivery method. The B-29 would not have been able to penetrate German controlled air space anymore. Then the post war development of our jet and missile technology would not have have happened on a similar time line, because we profited a lot from captured German technology and their scientist and engineers who decided to work for us. [[User:Count Iblis|Count Iblis]] ([[User talk:Count Iblis|talk]]) 17:09, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::: For a comparison of Hitler's and Napoleon's thinking which led them to attack the USSR/Russia I found [[Grigore Gafencu|Grégoire Gafenco]]'s <s>"''Preliminaires of the War in the East''" pretty interesting. Unfortunately there's no English translation, only the French original ("''Préliminaires de la guerre à l'Est''").</s> "''Prelude to the Russian Campaign''", London, 1945 (translated by Edgar Fletcher-Allen) pretty interesting. (But I read the French original "''Préliminaires de la guerre à l'Est''", Paris, 1944). Among the reasons that induced them to attack the USSR/Russia was also what they felt was the risk of leaving at the their back a huge power that could decide to attack them when circumstances allowed. We may think today there is zero chance Stalin/Alexander I would ever have done that, but the question is whether it was reasonable for them to believe they could. <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 20:01, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::: What was also a factor is that Hitler knew that sooner or later the US would join the war. That meant that Germany needed far more resources to be able to defend itself. The only way to get enough raw materials was to invade the Soviet Union and then get control of the vast oil and gas reserves there. Also Germany was engaged in Northern Africa, the plan was that these forces would take control of the Mid East and then link up with the forces in the Caucasus. So, I think the mistake made by Hitler was to think too much in terms of the industrial base and control of territory to get the raw materials to power that industrial base, rather than attempting to expand the advantage in technology that Germany already had. [[User:Count Iblis|Count Iblis]] ([[User talk:Count Iblis|talk]]) 20:56, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== UK elections 2015 == |
|||
I have two questions: How many candidates were of Bangladeshi descent? and is there a list of candidates for Respect Party on the internet? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Donmust90|Donmust90]] ([[User talk:Donmust90|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Donmust90|contribs]]) 18:46, 11 May 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:See [http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/other-news/Over-50-Indian-origin-candidates-in-UK-general-election/articleshow/47192440.cms this article] and [http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/ge15/cand/other.htm UK General Election 2015 candidates - Other candidates]. [[User:Nanonic|Nanonic]] ([[User talk:Nanonic|talk]]) 18:59, 11 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
= May 12 = |
|||
== Muslims killed by .... won't go to Paradise == |
|||
I have heard several versions of this tale. In the 80's I heard from a UN soldier that they used to fix bayonets because they were feared by Muslims who thought they wouldn't go to [[Jannah|Paradise]] if they were killed by steel. I've heard that being killed by a bullet smeared with pig blood or grease will bar Muslims from Paradise. Lately I've heard the same about why female [[Peshmerga]] fighters are so feared: they say a Muslim killed by a woman wont go to Paradise. |
|||
I call bullshit on all of those, partly because (as I understand it) intent or recklessness is needed for an action to be considered sinful in Islam. Also, about the death by steel, dying by steel would for many centuries be the most common way to go for those that died in battle. Surely one would have heard something about how those warriors, even though they died for the cause would be barred from Paradise. But, I'm not 100 % sure that the tales are 100 % untrue, especially considering that Islam is almost as diverse as Christianity. There are in other religions ways to die that will prevent you from entering heaven, like suicide in Christianity or that [[Valhalla]] was only for those that died in battle, so it's not entirely unlikely. Are there any denominations in Islam where some ways of dying will bar you from Paradise? [[User:Sjö|Sjö]] ([[User talk:Sjö|talk]]) 05:41, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Religious_views_on_suicide#Islam|Suicide]] is the first that comes to mind, at least in most mainstream forms of Islam.[[User:Bosstopher|Bosstopher]] ([[User talk:Bosstopher|talk]]) 07:25, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Bullets covered in pig blood were supposedly used by [[Jack Pershing]] in the Philippines, and the idea has resurfaced more recently of course, although I doubt anyone has ever actually done that. Anyway, doing something terrible to a Muslim to prevent them from going to heaven is a 100% sure way for them to be considered a [[shahid|martyr]] who will automatically end up in heaven no matter what you've done to them. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 10:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::This is right up there with silver bullets for werewolves and a stake through the heart for vampires. There's no evidence that ''anyone'' goes to 'paradise', and certainly no basis for any claims that non-Muslims can 'invent' ways that 'prevent' Muslims from getting there. Beyond really bad fan fiction, it's drivel.--[[User:Jeffro77|<span style='color:#365F91'>'''Jeffro'''</span><span style='color:#FFC000'>''77''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jeffro77|talk]]) 11:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::Sjö is asking about doctrine and belief (which often differ), and is not positing an actual paradise. (This is WP:RDH, not WP:RDS!) Sjö could have carefully carried the "feared" and "thought" used in the second sentence throughout the entire question, but doing so would yield a tedious passage. -- [[User talk:Thinking of England|ToE]] 13:50, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::Apparently you missed the point. The silly ''claims'' about what 'prevents' Muslims from getting into 'paradise' are typically ''invented'' by ''non-Muslims''. As such, they are just stupid bigoted fiction.--[[User:Jeffro77|<span style='color:#365F91'>'''Jeffro'''</span><span style='color:#FFC000'>''77''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jeffro77|talk]]) 22:06, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Well the "story" is that in Islam, if you are "unclean" you don't go to heaven, touching pork makes you unclean until you can wash (or whatever the appropriate purifiaction ritual is). So if someone put pork on a bullet, the last thing the shot muslim will touch is pork, making them unclean. Ergo.... I've seen a video of a soldier dipping bullets in SPAM before loading them into his magazine. I'm sure if you google muslim spam bullets you'll find it. Now having said that, I have NOT seen any muslim reaction to that kind of thing, whether they actually believe they'd be made unclean by those bullets or if it would have any bearing on their eligibility to paradise, I personally doubt it as it seems dying defending islam is amongst the highest honor (among people inclined to die "defending" Islam at any rate), but have no source to back that up. [[User:Vespine|Vespine]] ([[User talk:Vespine|talk]]) 06:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::I shouldn't have stealthily linked to it above - [[shahid]] has plenty of references for that. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 10:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::No, Vespine, you're just wrong. Muslims are even permitted to ''eat'' pork if no other food is available, so the claim that ''someone else'' murdering them with 'bullets with pigs blood on them' will 'prevent them getting in to paradise' is just stupid bigoted nonsense. It doesn't matter how many bigoted idiots 'imagine' this nonsense 'works'. And how would the dead Muslim know that the bullet had been 'dipped in SPAM' anyway? You've simply demonstrated that it's ''not'' really about what ''Muslims'' believe, but what bigoted idiots believe.--[[User:Jeffro77|<span style='color:#365F91'>'''Jeffro'''</span><span style='color:#FFC000'>''77''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jeffro77|talk]]) 12:37, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Jeffro, I have no dog in this fight, but it appears to me that you are arguing with people who are saying the same things as you in slightly different ways. Just sayin'. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/212.95.237.92|212.95.237.92]] ([[User talk:212.95.237.92|talk]]) 13:02, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::: <small> Why do people end their posts with "Just sayin(g)"? What does it mean, apart from what was obviously true without them saying it, viz. that whatever it was they were just saying was something they were ... er, just saying? Just askin(g). I breathed about 40 times while I was typing this. Just breathing. I blinked a few times, too. Just blinking. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<span style="font-size:85%"><font face="Verdana" ><sup>[pleasantries]</sup></font></span>]] 21:49, 13 May 2015 (UTC) </small> |
|||
::::::::::<small>As with many expressions it means more than a literal interpretation of its words. At its best it is a modern appeal against "shooting the messenger" or a rephrasing of the older "I merely make an observation," and is tagged onto the end of a comment which the well-intentioned author fears might be taken as insulting or argumentative. At its worst and most passive aggressive it is sarcastically tagged onto the end of an intended insult. This latter usage is pervasive, but in this case all appearances suggest that Tpfka87 intended the former usage. For more information you could re-ask your question on [[WP:RDL]]. Just sayin'. -- [[User talk:Thinking of England|ToE]] 23:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:::::::::::<small>Just thankin' you. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<span style="font-size:85%"><font face="Verdana" ><sup>[pleasantries]</sup></font></span>]] 05:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC) </small> |
|||
::::::::::::<small> You'd have to actually thank him somehow to be able to then tag that "Just thankin' you". On its own like this, well, I don't know. In this specific case you could, if you wanted, engage in a rant that does not much look like thanks and then go: "Just thankin' you". That would be the agressive or sarcastic use of the phrase mentioned above. I'm, er, "just tryin' to help". <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 10:51, 14 May 2015 (UTC) </small> |
|||
:::::::::::Jeffro77, '''I'M''' not wrong, I am simply reporting the 'claims', I am an atheists so I also believe it's all nonsense. Yes it's stupid bigoted nonsense, I don't disagree. There is I believe a "subtle" point you are "missing" though, and that is that peope can ACTUALLY BELIEVE these things, i.e. they don't need to be "aware" that the bullets are covered in pig's blood for it to 'work', for them this is the way the world works whether you believe it or not, that's why THEY are right and we are wrong (I'm talking about muslims AND christians). In their "reality" this IS the way things work, so simply showing muslims that there are bullets covered in spam is enough elicit the desired response. Of course in THIS particlar case, covering bullets in blood is based on a misunderstanding of Islamic doctrine, but the argument is sound: '''IF''' the unclean don't get into heaven (which probably IS the case in some circumstances) and '''IF''' getting shot with a unclean bullet makes you unclean (this is probably not the case) THEN someone shot with an unclean bullet won't go to heaven. The argument is [[Validity|valid]], however one premise is almost certainly faulty. [[User:Vespine|Vespine]] ([[User talk:Vespine|talk]]) 22:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::Further, if it's not abundantly clear, the action's intention is [[Psychological warfare]]. [[User:Vespine|Vespine]] ([[User talk:Vespine|talk]]) 00:12, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::::No, someone ''can't'' actually 'believe' that they won't go to 'paradise' when they're killed by a bullet that they '''have no way of knowing''' was 'dipped in [insert pig-based food product]' because 1) they would have no way of knowing it was dipped in said foodstuff (so the claim is wrong in practical terms) and 2) the Koran doesn't forbid Muslims from ''unavoidably'' coming in contact with pigs (so the claim is wrong on doctrinal terms).--[[User:Jeffro77|<span style='color:#365F91'>'''Jeffro'''</span><span style='color:#FFC000'>''77''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jeffro77|talk]]) 12:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::::: Leaving aside the question of whether any of the specific stories alluded to above has ever actually occurred, as a general point it is worth pointing out that 1) there is a way to '''"let them know"''', by spreading rumors for example, and 2) not all Muslims are expert theologians, '''there are such things as superstitions and superstitious people''' especially among the uneducated, in other words what the qur'ān says, in your opinion or in the opinion of expert ʿulamāʾ, might not be what superstitious uneducated people believe, and finally 3) '''this thread is becoming tiresome'''. Just sayin'. <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 12:45, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::::Jeffro, of course it is possible for someone to believe (ie fear) that if they are killed by a bullet smeared in pork, they won't be let into to paradise. To illustrate: I may believe that, whether ''I'' know that the bullet was "tainted" or not, Allah will know... and keep me out of paradise (and wouldn't that be a nasty surprise!). That said... I do agree that the story is more likely to be something that was made up by non-muslims. [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 15:55, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::::::It's ''possible'' for ''anyone'' to 'believe' ''just about anything''. It certainly doesn't make it ''representative'' of Islam (or any other particular group). It's a pretty limited scenario in which a particular Muslim dying from a bullet wound 'knows' at that time that the specific bullet came from a nutter who had smeared it with pig's blood. A dying person probably isn't going to speculate wildly that their hideous injury 'might' have been caused by some idiot they once saw on Youtube. A Muslim devout enough to worry that they might not be getting to paradise would also most likely know that something ''done to them'' in this manner would not be 'impediment' to such a 'reward'.--[[User:Jeffro77|<span style='color:#365F91'>'''Jeffro'''</span><span style='color:#FFC000'>''77''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jeffro77|talk]]) 22:00, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Following up on [[[[User:Jeffro77]]s comment above. From [[Halal#Exception if no halal is available]] it is clear that Muslims can eat pork rather than starve. So it's not likely that being killed by a bullet that they didn't know was dipped in pigs blood isn't likely to be a barrier to paradise. I would suspect that the question has been posed to one of the Islamic ask an Iman forums. Given the [https://www.google.com/search?q=killed+by+bullet+smeared+in+pig+blood&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&gws_rd=ssl hits here] it seems this is a non-Muslim belief more than a Muslim one. |
|||
== Inconsistent apostrophes in older work == |
|||
See [https://books.google.com/books?id=nvY8AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA414&lpg=PA414&dq=%22christ+crucify%27d%22&source=bl&ots=NPRxe7y4Rb&sig=3Ux5JEbZ6JC1Kprq_yfLQKNy4jM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JvxRVf7qCIOhNpmUgKAH&ved=0CCAQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=%22christ%20crucify'd%22&f=false this page], where ''crucify'd'' appears in reſponſe #1, ''rais'd'' in point 10, ''receiv'd'' and ''confeſ'd'' in point 11, and ''betray'd'' in the final full line. I've encountered this use a lot lately while working with 17th- and 18th-century English publications. What was the point? I mean, I understand that it conveys a two-syllable ''re-ceived'' versus a three-syllable ''re-ceiv-ed'', but why print it that way? The printers generally don't seem to have attempted to use [[eye dialect]] for these publications, and anyway ''-ed'' also appears numerous times; ''ſtrengthened'' and ''confirmed'' appear just before ''crucify'd'', and the final large paragraph on the same page includes ''purchased'' and ''admitted''. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 13:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Under the original pronunciation, there was a deliberate strong accent on the -ed part of past tense words, so "confirmed" would have been pronounced "con-firm-ED", with the last syllable distinctly sounding like the male name "Ed". The addition of the 'd is a note that ''those'' words were pronounced -d rather than -ed. Remember that prior to the early 18th century, '''there was no standardized spelling'''. All spelling was foneticklee done, so each writer did their best to spell words as they felt they would most likely be read. There were some dialectical standards that developed somewhat organically among people who were formally trained in the same tradition (that is, people who learned to write in the same area in the same sorts of schools), but it wasn't until the great dictionary writers of the late 1700s and early 1800s that there came to be a standardized English spelling, people like [[Noah Webster]] (for [[American English]]) and [[Samuel Johnson]] (for [[British English]]) are often credited with establishing the formal standardized spelling we see today. The best Wikipedia article I can find to cover this in one place is probably [[English-language spelling reform]], though it concentrates more on ''unrealized'' attempts to alter [[English As She Is Spoke|English as she is wrote]] today, it does cover some of the historical movements to standardize English, touching on the various printing "house styles" that were used, as well as the work of Webster and Johnson and others. Prior to them, there simply ''wasn't'' any authority on English spelling, and there was wide variation. When researching an older topic, like for example when I was working on the [[Plymouth Colony]] article, you find in the original writings a wide variety of spellings, for example [[Myles Standish]] is as often as not spelled ''Miles'' Standish, and the name of the settlement itself can by Plymoth, Plymouth, Plimoth, Plimouth, etc. There just was no standard. It got better throughout the 1700s, and by the early 1800s there was more unformity, by the middle of the 19th century we had reached the modern standards. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 14:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::[edit conflict] Prior to the 17th century, the ''e'' in ''-ed'' actually was pronounced, especially in careful speech. (See [http://public.oed.com/aspects-of-english/english-in-time/grammar-in-early-modern-english/ this source].) This pronunciation may have been remembered during the 17th and 18th centuries as old-fashioned, and/or it may have survived in some contexts longer than in others, for example after a stressed syllable. So the apostrophe represents a conscious omission of the vowel. Also, spelling was not standardized during these centuries, so it is not surprising that the spelling varies between apostrophes and silent 'e's. [[User:Marco polo|Marco polo]] ([[User talk:Marco polo|talk]]) 14:05, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Jayron, are you sure that the last syllable of premodern English preterites was actually stressed? Certainly it was pronounced, with a distinct vowel (probably ɛ) in Middle English but with a schwa (ə) by the 16th century. However, it would be a striking departure from the Germanic pattern for that syllable to be stressed. [[User:Marco polo|Marco polo]] ([[User talk:Marco polo|talk]]) 14:09, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::Please read what I already wrote. '''I understand that it conveys a two-syllable ''re-ceived'' versus a three-syllable ''re-ceiv-ed'''''. Moreover, I'm not addressing what today we consider alternate spellings — believe me, I could go on about this; not being familiar with the [http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=eebo;idno=A68107.0001.001 University of Michigan's online edition], I transcribed the contents for [[William Gouge]]'s ''Of domesticall duties'', fourteen pages of ''wiues'' and ''inioying, or wanting of prosperitie''. I'm asking about the phenomenon that the same page of the same book will alternate between -ed and -'d, a phenomenon that is common to many works. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 14:21, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::Both Jayron and I stated that spelling was not standardized before the 19th century. So it is not surprising to see spellings change within a work, even on the same page, between an apostrophe and a silent 'e'. I don't understand what question of yours has not yet been answered. [[User:Marco polo|Marco polo]] ([[User talk:Marco polo|talk]]) 14:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::They may have wanted it to be pronounced differently to match the different spellings. This is similar to how I often use the full form of a word or a shortened version, to avoid sounding repetitive: "I ''utilize'' long forms to complement ''use'' of short forms." [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 14:47, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::In some dialects of English in the north of the country, and notably [[Braid Scots]], the "ed" is still enunciated as a distinct syllable to this day, though the syllable is unstressed and unvoiced, and the vowel is virtually a [[schwa]] rather than anything clearer, so the "ed" tends to be written as "it". See, for example, the "waukit" [[Scots_language#Sample_text_of_Modern_Scots|in this sample]]. [[User:RomanSpa|RomanSpa]] ([[User talk:RomanSpa|talk]]) 17:46, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
* This question may have attracted some more good sources if it had been posted to the Language Desk. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<span style="font-size:85%"><font face="Verdana" ><sup>[pleasantries]</sup></font></span>]] 23:00, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:It may be worth mentioning that printers of the time felt free to use variant spellings to remove or add space in justified lines of type. I obviously can't say whether that was the case in the OP's example, but it can account for such inconsistencies. [[User:Deor|Deor]] ([[User talk:Deor|talk]]) 13:00, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Stella van der Loopen == |
|||
Is Stella van der Loopen a chrysanthemum, a heroine of the American War of Independence, or something by Romney in the Louvre? [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 22:48, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Are you sure she's not made up by H. H. Munro? Clearly "van der Loopen" is a Dutch surname, but the only google hits for "Stella van der Loopen" point to the novel you just quoted. If she was a war heroine, she is now thoroughly forgotten; if a flower was named after her, the name didn't stick and I find it frankly inconceivable that a painting by a famous artist hanging in one of the world's most prestigious museums would get no results on google whatsoever. - [[User:Lindert|Lindert]] ([[User talk:Lindert|talk]]) 23:28, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::I suppose Saki ''could'' have made it up, but I find that he usually refers to real people, icebreakers, restaurants, etc in comments like that. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 23:37, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::: But in this case he may have felt it wasn't him who made it up, but his character. And I think it is "Novipazar", but, again, it wouldn't be Saki's mistake, but his character's. It'd still be interesting to figure out what may have led him to specifically manufacture "Stella van der Loopen". Are there maybe a chrysanthemum, etc. whose names ''sound a bit like that'' but are not quite it? <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 23:46, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::Novibazar would have been standard English usage at the time. But the chaplain also found himself unable to remember which Stella van der Loopen was. Your suggestion of something or someone that sounds a bit like it could be right. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 23:58, 12 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::: Note Google returns no result for "Van der Loopen"/"Van der Lopen" or "Vander Loopen"/"Vander Lopen" or "Vanderloopen"/"Vanderlopen". The latter would be a newer way to spell such names, but the spelling of surnames rarely gets updated. There does not seem to be a surname "Van der Loopen" etc. In any case Google only knows about "Van der Loop" etc. <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 19:09, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::It may have to do with search location, but I do find one facebook page of someone with the surname "Van der Loopen". - [[User:Lindert|Lindert]] ([[User talk:Lindert|talk]]) 22:59, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
= May 13 = |
|||
== Iranian reactions to the Andijan massacre? == |
|||
Does anyone have any information about the reaction of the Iranian government (if any) after the [[Andijan massacre]]? What kind of relations were/are there between Iran and Uzbekistan before/after? Did the Andijan massacre change anything regarding those relations? Thanks. <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 00:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:It was mentioned as a bloody massacre in the press, but it didn't change anything in moderate relations between the two governments. [[User:Omidinist|Omidinist]] ([[User talk:Omidinist|talk]]) 03:31, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::So reactions in the Iranian press but no official reactions at all? Do I understand this right? In 2009 the Iranian government called for international sanctions against Germany when <u>one</u> Muslim Egyptian (!) woman was murdered in a Dresden courtroom by a psycho who had nothing whatsoever to do with the German government. Has anyone seen anywhere an explanation for the apparent inconsistency? What "algorithm" does the Iranian government use to decide when to react and when not to to the killing of Muslims? <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 13:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::Oh, please. As if Western governments did not apply all kinds of double standards based on their material, strategic, or ideological interests. For example, Western governments tend to be much more vocal about violations of human rights in Iran than in Saudi Arabia. [[User:Marco polo|Marco polo]] ([[User talk:Marco polo|talk]]) 13:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::: No kidding? My question was not about a comparison between various inconsistent behaviors but about how things work in Iran. Does this sort of "double standards" always have some rational explanation? I do have some sort of idea as to what explains Western "double standards" but am fairly ignorant in the case of Iran so I thought I'd ask people with more expertise. To say that Western countries do it too does not really explain why, when and how Iran does it. Or are you saying that Iran does it specifically to match Western inconsistency? (Like "We can be just as inconsistent as you") But in fact what strikes me as odd sometimes in the case of Iran (maybe that's just because of my ignorance) is that their "double standards" cannot be explained using objective strategic arguments like they can for instance in the case of the US, that Iranian policies seem to be driven by ideology ''against'' what would seem to be their own objective strategic interests. For example an objective analysis would seem to indicate (unless it's again my ignorance) that Iran and Israel ought to be allies and the Arab countries in between should be adversaries to both. There does not seem to be anything about which Iran and Israel are objective competitors. But instead, because of ideology, you see this three-way enmity which must be a pretty rare if not unique geopolitical configuration. And to get back to my question, I really don't see why Iran needs Uzbekistan, whereas I thought there were important commercial relations between Germany and Iran. So, to just say "Western countries apply double standard too" can hardly serve as a useful explanation for Iranian behavior. <small style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:red">here</span>]]</small> 15:02, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I think a fear of [[Colour revolutions|Colour Revolutions]] which had happened a year or two earlier in the same region might have caused a cautionary approach. This same fear led to government clampdown on peaceful demonstrations of Iranians after the presidential elections of 2009. Protesters were accused of having been inspired by Colour Revolutions and having subversive intentions. [[User:Omidinist|Omidinist]] ([[User talk:Omidinist|talk]]) 17:49, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Sorry, I misread you. I thought that you were expressing moral outrage, when in fact you were honestly looking for an explanation. My apologies. In the [[Iranian legislative election, 2004]], just one year before the massacre, Iran's [[Council of Guardians]] had vetoed the candidacy of more than 2,000 reformist candidates. Support for Uzbeks protesting government repression would have been embarrassing and/or risky for the Iranian government, as it was complicit in such repression itself. The government could well have felt that implicitly supporting the Uzbeki protests might provide an opening for domestic protests. (How could the government crack down after condemning the crackdown in Uzbekistan?) The demonstrations of 2009, mentioned by Omnidinist, bear out the risk (from the government's perspective) of anti-government protest in Iran at this time. Also, the defense of Islam is central to the Iranian government's claim to legitimacy. In Uzbekistan, both the protesters and security forces were Muslim, and so there was no way Iran could portray Andijan as an assault on Islam or Muslims calling for an Iranian response. In essence, the Iranian government saw nothing to gain from speaking out on the massacre. By contrast, an assault on a Muslim in a western country is an opportunity for the Iranian government to bolster its legitimacy in the eyes of Iranian Muslims by speaking out in protest. So its response to the murder in Germany was probably based more on domestic political considerations than foreign policy. [[User:Marco polo|Marco polo]] ([[User talk:Marco polo|talk]]) 19:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Copyright for Maya hieroglyphs font based on drawings by scholar Thompson == |
|||
Hello. I have a question about copyright law for a specific font. I've scanned through the Wikipedia article [[Intellectual property protection of typefaces]] but it's all pretty confusing with the technical difference between fonts, typefaces, etc. and what can be copyrighted and what can't. |
|||
Anyways, the creator of the font "Maya 4.14" [http://users.teilar.gr/~g1951d/ here] makes the following claim at the bottom of his page: "In lieu of a licence, fonts and documents in this site are not pieces of property or merchandise items; they carry no trademark, copyright, license or other market tags; they are free for any use. George Douros." |
|||
Basically, George Duoros based himself on "A Catalog of Maya Hieroglyphs by J. Eric S. Thompson" to make his font. The Catalog is composed of drawings made by Thompson and the use of his drawings is limited to scholarly use [http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/thompson/ThompsonGlyphCatalog.pdf (see here)] (Copyright © 1962 University of Oklahoma Press. All rights reserved.). |
|||
My question is, however, if I can use this font freely for whatever purpose, commercial or not, as George Duoros states/implies. I had understood that his ''drawings'' were copyrighted, but that fonts can't be copyrighted, and when George Duoros created this font he specifically stated that it os free for any use. |
|||
Thanks in advance! |
|||
--[[Special:Contributions/190.192.233.38|190.192.233.38]] ([[User talk:190.192.233.38|talk]]) 01:42, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Read [[WP:COPY]] and if the advice there is not clear, ask for help at the [[WP:Help desk]]. Those pages specialize on such technical on-site issues. WE help with external matters, except things like law, and we'd be giving legal advice if we commented, which we are not allowed to do. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 05:48, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Derivative work]] and [[transformativeness]] are probably relevant articles. [[User:SemanticMantis|SemanticMantis]] ([[User talk:SemanticMantis|talk]]) 13:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Parent & child life peers == |
|||
Apart from [[Peter Palumbo, Baron Palumbo|Peter]] and [[James Palumbo, Baron Palumbo of Southwark|James Palumbo]], are there, or have there ever been, any other instances of a parent and child both being life peers? [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 18:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't know where you can get a complete list, but it has certainly happened. For example, consider [[Anthony Hurd, Baron Hurd]] and [[Douglas Hurd]], both of whom were Conservative Party politicians. [[User:RomanSpa|RomanSpa]] ([[User talk:RomanSpa|talk]]) 19:28, 13 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::You could go through the four pages at [[List of life peerages]] and sort by last name which may give you something. I accidentally found [[Robin Hodgson, Baron Hodgson of Astley Abbotts]] who married [[Fiona Hodgson, Baroness Hodgson of Abinger]] in 1982. He became a life peer in 2000 and she became one in 2013. [[User:CambridgeBayWeather|CambridgeBayWeather]], [[User talk:CambridgeBayWeather|Uqaqtuq (talk)]], [[Special:Contributions/CambridgeBayWeather|Sunasuttuq]] 23:12, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
= May 14 = |
|||
== Birds flying into large picture windows == |
|||
I have noticed that, up on the second floor, birds frequently fly right into the glass of some big picture windows. They must think that the clear glass is just "open air", so they fly right into it. They cannot see the clear glass. When they crash into the window, they make a loud thud. Sometimes, they get killed. Other times, they are just stunned and eventually fly away. My question is: is there any way to prevent this? Of course, when I keep the blinds down or the curtains drawn, the birds see those items through the clear glass. And, thus, they do not fly into the window. However, it's not always practical (or desirable) to constantly keep the blinds down and the curtains drawn. I am looking for a realistic solution, also. For example, I can probably get some duct tape and tape it in the shape of a big "X" across the window. This will probably be enough to alert the birds that the window is not, in fact, open airspace. But, realistically, I am not going to do that. Any thoughts? Thanks. [[User:Joseph A. Spadaro|ocated in a riverside park in Toronto.Joseph A. Spadaro]] ([[User talk:Joseph A. Spadaro|talk]]) 00:52, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:I found an obscure website that may help: [https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1LDJZ_enUS500US500&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=how%20to%20keep%20birds%20from%20flying%20into%20your%20windows]. Try that. --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 01:02, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::I've seen cut-out silhouettes of [[raptor (bird)|raptors]] stuck onto such windows to deter birds from approaching. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 01:34, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Indeed, the [[Royal Society for the Protection of Birds]] sell such stickers [http://shopping.rspb.org.uk/bird-silhouettes-window-stickers.html Bird silhouette window stickers]. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 01:36, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::[https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3889/14360350285_6df2510866_b.jpg Here's an example of silhouettes in use] at [[Old Mill (TTC)|a station on the Toronto subway]] where it comes above ground to cross [[Humber River (Ontario)|a river]] and the adjacent park. --[[Special:Contributions/174.88.135.200|174.88.135.200]] ([[User talk:174.88.135.200|talk]]) 09:59, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::: That's odd. Wouldn't those silhouettes ''attract'' rather than ''repel'' other birds? [[User:Joseph A. Spadaro|Joseph A. Spadaro]] ([[User talk:Joseph A. Spadaro|talk]]) 19:38, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::The Audubon Society of Portland sell a similar product, and have a page of information about this problem [http://audubonportland.org/wcc/urban/windows Birds and Windows]. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 01:39, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::American Bird Conservancy advice [http://audubonportland.org/files/hazards/abc You can save birds from flying into windows!] |
|||
::I do hope this helps, [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 01:42, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::[[Bird-skyscraper collisions#Solutions]] lists a number of suggestions, but notes "some are unproven". [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 03:37, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Did the French schools in Kabul close? == |
|||
I want to the see if the [[Centre d'Enseignement Français en Afghanistan]] (Lycees Estlaqal and Malalai) closed. They no longer appear on [[AEFE]]'s lists of schools and the websites haven't been updated, but I'm unable to confirm if they have closed or not. |
|||
[[User:WhisperToMe|WhisperToMe]] ([[User talk:WhisperToMe|talk]]) 07:32, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
: You might ask the French Embassy? There is an email on their website [http://www.ambafrance-af.org/Coordonnees-contacts-et-plan-d here]. [[Special:Contributions/184.147.117.34|184.147.117.34]] ([[User talk:184.147.117.34|talk]]) 21:14, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Mirabeau and the end of absolutism == |
|||
[[Eric Hobsbawm]] in ''The Age Of Revolution: 1789-1848'', p. 60, defines the end of absolutism in France by quoting a speech of [[Honoré Gabriel Riqueti, comte de Mirabeau|Mirabeau]]: "Absolutism was at an end as Mirabeau, a brilliant and disreputable ex-noble, told the King: 'Sire, you are a stranger in this assembly, you have not the right to speak here.' (annotation #5)". Annotation #5 is [[Albert Goodwin (historian)|Albert Goodwin]], ''The French Revolution'' (1959 ed.), p. 70, which I do not have. Did Mirabeau really say that and what was the wording in French? --[[User:Stuhlsasse|Stuhlsasse]] ([[User talk:Stuhlsasse|talk]]) 19:44, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
: In the French Wikipedia article on [http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor%C3%A9-Gabriel_Riqueti_de_Mirabeau#Le_d.C3.A9put.C3.A9_du_Tiers_.C3.89tat_et_le_tribunal Mirabeau] there's a very similar quote (without the stranger part). He was not speaking to the king but to the master of ceremonies who was speaking for the king. ''"Oui, Monsieur, nous avons entendu les intentions qu’on a suggérées au Roy ; et vous qui ne sauriez être son organe auprès des États-Généraux, vous qui n’avez ici ni place ni voix, ni droit de parler, vous n’êtes pas fait pour nous rappeler son discours."'' It's sourced to the Moniteur newspaper, 25 June 1789 (that's the date of the newspaper, which was a few days after the speech). [[Special:Contributions/184.147.117.34|184.147.117.34]] ([[User talk:184.147.117.34|talk]]) 21:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::[[The French Revolution: A History|Carlyle]] (chapter 1.5.II) agrees with the text, and the citation (''[[Le Moniteur Universel|Moniteur]]'' (Hist. Parl. ii. 22)). Mirabeau was addressing [[Henri Evrard, marquis de Dreux-Brézé]]. [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] ([[User talk:Tevildo|talk]]) 21:45, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::Oh my goodness, that's it! Thank you both. --[[User:Stuhlsasse|Stuhlsasse]] ([[User talk:Stuhlsasse|talk]]) 00:03, 15 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Is a specific story or author in the public domain? == |
|||
How do I find out if a specific author-- or specific story-- is in the public domain? I would like to upload some onto Duolingo, a site where people can learn languages for free, and practice translating uploaded articles and works (which don't violate copyright). For example, short story "The Coming of the Ice" was published in 1923 (I think) in Amazing Stories. |
|||
A different author, Edgar Allan Poe, died maybe 66 years ago. I don't know if his works are in the public domain. |
|||
Maybe some are, and some are not. What rules apply? Layman's terms would be appreciated. |
|||
I have found general guidelines (i.e., 70 years after author's death for printed works; some might be released sooner at author's discretion, or if copyright is not renewed; a lot depends on the time period; under certain conditions copyright may be extended). But I am not a lawyer. Such rules offer little help in specific cases. |
|||
Where can I find a search that says that this specific story, poem, or author's works, are in the public domain/ creative commons? Yes, no, status unclear, circumstances that may affect it? I have found a website which has a number of "pulp fiction" (I especially like SF/Fantasy) stories '''which they believe are in the public domain. To the best of their knowledge'''-- but they caution readers to do outside homework to verify this. |
|||
How do I do that homework? I want to quickly and easily ascertain whether (X story/poem/author) may be safely copied and shared in person, or on the Internet, without violating copyright. I appreciate your assistance. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/208.106.44.217|208.106.44.217]] ([[User talk:208.106.44.217|talk]]) 21:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
: [[Edgar Allan Poe]] died in 1849, which was 166 years ago. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<span style="font-size:85%"><font face="Verdana" ><sup>[pleasantries]</sup></font></span>]] 21:58, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
: I don't know if there is such a site; but I doubt it. If it were possible to do this "quickly and easily", then the writers of that website would probably have done it (unless they are just covering their backs, which is possible). --[[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 23:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Project Gutenberg]], a project which collects public domain works, has a "[https://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Copyright_How-To Copyright How-To]" for the rules they use, as well as a [https://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Copyright_FAQ Copyright FAQ]. Their process is based off of US copyright law, though. If you're in another jurisdiction the copyright laws will be different. (Many locations have harmonized their copyright laws, but most public domain works typically fall under the pre-harmonization rules.) There are versions of Project Gutenberg localized to other jurisdictions, to accommodate the varying laws of different countries, so if US law doesn't apply for your purposes, you can possibly look for your country's version of Project Gutenberg for guidance. -- [[Special:Contributions/160.129.138.186|160.129.138.186]] ([[User talk:160.129.138.186|talk]]) 00:11, 15 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Agree you will need to find out which country the website is in, and follow the [[public domain]] rules for that particular country. For example, see [[Public domain in the United States]]. [[Public Domain Calculator]] also may provide useful links. [[Special:Contributions/184.147.117.34|184.147.117.34]] ([[User talk:184.147.117.34|talk]]) 01:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Citations on [[Didius Julianus]] == |
|||
Can someone help me decipher the references in [[Didius Julianus]]. In particular to what does, "Cassius Dio, lxxiv, 11.5" refer. I am assuming it's [[Cassius Dio]]'s History of Rome. I found fragment lxxiv of book 1 at project guttenberg, [http://www.gutenberg.org/files/18047/18047-h/18047-h.htm#LXXIV]. But then I don't know to what 11.5 refers, and this fragment clearly has nothing to do with the referenced text in the article. So I'm guessing this citation is referring to some other part of the work, but I'm not able to figure out which. Thanks in a advance for the help. --''best, kevin'' <b>[</b>[[User:Kzollman|kzollman]]<b>][</b>[[User talk:Kzollman|talk]]<b>]</b> 22:33, 14 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:This refers to Cassius Dio, book lxxiv (or 74), chapter 11, sentence 5, [http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/74*.html English translation]. --[[User:Stuhlsasse|Stuhlsasse]] ([[User talk:Stuhlsasse|talk]]) 00:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Perfect! Thank you, Stuhlsasse. --''best, kevin'' <b>[</b>[[User:Kzollman|kzollman]]<b>][</b>[[User talk:Kzollman|talk]]<b>]</b> 01:07, 15 May 2015 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 15:59, 12 January 2025
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
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.
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)
- Which article does that appear in? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- It must be this article. 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? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Each time, the word šꜣ is written over the Seth-animal.
[1]Sometimes the animal is designated as sha (šꜣ) , but we are not certain at all whether this designation was its name.
[2]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.
[3]šꜣ ‘Seth-animal’
[4]He claims that the domestic pig is called “sha,” the name of the Set-animal.
[5]
- It must be this article. Omidinist (talk) 04:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
| |||||||
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)
- 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
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)
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)
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)
- Assuming he's talking about England, does he propose building a bridge over the Channel? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- How about a tunnel? --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). 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). PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- How about a tunnel? --Wrongfilter (talk) 12:29, 30 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 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- As for (2), the tense is still alive and kicking, if I do say so myself. 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} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 02:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- This is not what I am asking. 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} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 13:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- I kid you not. --Lambiam 23:47, 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} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 13:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- This is not what I am asking. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 05:05, 31 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} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 02:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
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)
- 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)
- One estimate is (less than) [6] one percent. --Askedonty (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- We have a Lost literary work article with a large "Antiquity" section. 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. --Lambiam 23:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Few things which might be helpful:
- So profuse was Galen's output that the surviving texts represent nearly half of all the extant literature from ancient Greece.[1]
- Although not just Greek, but only 1% of ancient literature survives.[2] --ExclusiveEditor 🔔 Ping Me! 11:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
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)
- 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)
- There's also the fictionalised Ilich Ramírez Sánchez / Carlos the Jackal from the Jason Bourne novels. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
References
[edit]I am on to creating an article on Lu Chun 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)
- 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)
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)
- 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,[7] 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)
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)
- 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)
- Apparently yes: Dean Corll was killed by one of his his accomplices, Elmer Wayne Henley. --Antiquary (talk) 12:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- Aren't hired killers distinct from the usual concept of a serial killer? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 09:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Outside the movies? Sure, on TV. 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. 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. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
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)
- Ted Kaczynski ("the Unabomber") comes to mind. --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. 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. --Lambiam 15:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Joseph Paul Franklin. Prezbo (talk) 13:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
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)
- 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)
- It would also be odd to call it a "London blaze". --Lambiam 15:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- The closest I found was the 1861 Tooley Street fire. 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?). [8] 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". [9]. --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)
- Also a large fire at Wood Street in the City in 1882 (perhaps later mistaken for 1892?). [8] Alansplodge (talk) 16:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- The closest I found was the 1861 Tooley Street fire. Alansplodge (talk) 16:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @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)
- @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)
- 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)
- Oh, the poor ducks. --Lambiam 12:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
January 4
[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)
- 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? 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. --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 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)
- 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)
- 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 known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 07:15, 5 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.Rich (talk) 02:24, 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... AnonMoos (talk) 21:19, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
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)
- @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)
- 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)
- Stop using WordPerfect and start using Word. --Viennese Waltz 07:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- I don't know why, but it seems many legal professionals prefer WordPerfect. Stanleykswong (talk) 10:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Viennese Waltz, thanks so much for that helpful suggestion. Drmies (talk) 15:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- I don't know why, but it seems many legal professionals prefer WordPerfect. Stanleykswong (talk) 10:21, 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. Stanleykswong (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Stanleykswong, that sounds like it might work: thank you. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- User:Lambiam, WP translates easily to PDF and to Word. I use PDFs in my LMS. 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. 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. --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. 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. --Lambiam 21:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Here's a bunch of them, in the DOJ archives. Card Zero (talk) 00:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Here's a bunch of them, in the DOJ archives. Card Zero (talk) 00:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- User:Lambiam, WP translates easily to PDF and to Word. I use PDFs in my LMS. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 5 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? 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)
- 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)
- @Drmies: Under its default setting my screen reader does read out the hyphens, but I have my punctuation set lower than normal because I don't like hearing too much information so it doesn't for me. The other major Windows screen reader, NVDA, also reads them out by default. Graham87 (talk) 01:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks Graham87--I appreciate your expertise. Drmies (talk) 01:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- As recently discussed on the Help or Teahouse desk, a date or other range should technically use an unspaced En Dash, not a hyphen (according to most manuals of style, including our own), but I doubt that screen readers would notice the difference. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 08:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks Graham87--I appreciate your expertise. Drmies (talk) 01:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Drmies: Under its default setting my screen reader does read out the hyphens, but I have my punctuation set lower than normal because I don't like hearing too much information so it doesn't for me. The other major Windows screen reader, NVDA, also reads them out by default. Graham87 (talk) 01:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
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)
- Do any of the articles listed at Unionism help? Blueboar (talk) 14:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
January 6
[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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- I've poked around a little, and there doesn't appear to have been any change. Abductive (reasoning) 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. --Lambiam 14:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- That book is incorrect. Abductive (reasoning) 21:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- How do you know? --Lambiam 00:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- That book is incorrect. Abductive (reasoning) 21:07, 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. --Lambiam 14:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- I've poked around a little, and there doesn't appear to have been any change. Abductive (reasoning) 13:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
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)
- For starters, there's Index of joke types. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- AI generated jokes have been around for years. Just Google for it. They range from weird to meh. Shantavira|feed me 10:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Gershon Legman made an attempt of sorts in his two joke collections, but it was kind of a half-assed approach: there are a bunch of indices printed on pages, but no key tying them together per se. His interest was in the core of the subject of the joke, so he might have said, for example, that these jokes were all based on unresolved Oedipal drives while those jokes were based on hatred of the mother (he was a capital "F" Freudian). The link Bugs shared is more about the formats of the jokes themselves, though some are also differentiated by their subject (albeit in a more superficial way than Legman attempted). Matt Deres (talk) 21:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Arthur Koestler has attempted to develop a theory of humour (as well as art and discovery), first in Insight and Outlook (1949) and slightly elaborated further in The Act of Creation (1964). He did, however, not develop a typology of jokes. IMO Victor Raskin's script-based semantic theory of humor presented in Semantic Mechanisms of Humor (1985) is essentially the same as Koestler's, but Raskin does not reference Koestler in the book. For an extensive overview of theories of humour see Contemporary Linguistic Theories of Humour. --Lambiam 00:51, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
January 8
[edit]The Nest magazine, UK, 1920s
[edit]I have a copy of The Grocer's Window Book. London: The Nest Magazine. 1922., "arranged by The Editor of The Nest". The address of The Nest Magazine is given as 15 Arthur Street, London, EC4. It contains suggestions for arranging window displays in an attractive manner to attract customers into independent grocer's shops. I would be interested to know more about The Nest. I suspect it may have something to do with Nestles Milk, as 1) the back cover is a full-page advertisement for Nestles and Ideal Milk, and there are several other adverts for Nestles products in the book, and 2) one of the suggested window displays involves spelling out "IDEAL" with tins of Ideal Milk. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 02:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Nest, 1922. M.—1st. 6d. Nestle and Anglo-Swiss Condensed Milk Co., 15 Arthur Street, E.c.4
[10] according to Willing's press guide and advertisers directory and handbook. I also found it in The Newspaper press directory and advertisers' guide, which merely confirms the address and the price of sixpence. Both of these were for the year 1922, which suggests to me that the magazine might not have survived into 1923. M signifies monthly, and 1st probably means published on the 1st of the month. Card Zero (talk) 19:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Historical U.S. population data by age (year 1968)
[edit]In the year 1968, what percentage of the United States population was under 25 years old? I am wondering about this because I am watching the movie Wild in the Streets, and want to know if a percentage claimed in the film was pulled out of a hat or was based in fact. 2601:18A:C500:E830:CE4:140C:29E5:594F (talk) 04:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- What percentage did they give? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- 52% (it's on the movie poster). Card Zero (talk) 16:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Tabel No. 6 in the 1971 US Census Report (p. 8) gives, for 1960, 80093 Kpeople age 0–24 on a total population of 180007 Kpeople, corresponding to 44.5%, and, for 1970, 94095 Kpeople age 0–24 on a total population of 204265 Kpeople, corresponding to 46.1%. Interpolation results in an estimate of 45.8% for 1968. --Lambiam 12:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Who are Kpeople? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Reverse engineering and a spot of maths: k = kilo = 1 000 = 1 thousand. Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 10:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- So, Kpeople means 1 thousandpeople. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Reverse engineering and a spot of maths: k = kilo = 1 000 = 1 thousand. Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 10:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Who are Kpeople? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Countries with greatest land mass
[edit]Can someone please fill in these blanks? Thank you.
1. Currently, the USA ranks as number _____ among countries with the greatest land mass.
2. If the USA were to "annex" or "acquire" both Canada and Greenland, the USA would rank as number _____ among countries with the greatest land mass.
Thanks. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 05:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- See List of countries and dependencies by area, which gives a nuanced answer to your first question, and the answer to your second question is obvious from the data in the article.-Gadfium (talk) 05:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- 4 and 1. But the chance of Trump to annex Canada is close to zero. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Also the US somehow annexing Greenland is infinitely improbable. It's part of the European Union. Alansplodge (talk) 12:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Trump's presidential term is four years and the process of discussion would take longer than that. Stanleykswong (talk) 14:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- No it isn't. —Tamfang (talk) 00:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes it is effectively: Greenland and the European Union says "all citizens of the Realm of Denmark residing in Greenland (Greenlandic nationals) are EU citizens". Alansplodge (talk) 14:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- But Denmark is a NATO member. The US invading Greenland will trigger NATO Article 5. --Lambiam 11:14, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Also, US is a member of NATO. The situation will be very complicated. Stanleykswong (talk) 11:37, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- But Denmark is a NATO member. The US invading Greenland will trigger NATO Article 5. --Lambiam 11:14, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Also the US somehow annexing Greenland is infinitely improbable. It's part of the European Union. Alansplodge (talk) 12:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
January 11
[edit]JeJu AirFlight 2216
[edit]Is this the beginning of a new conspiracy theory? On 11 January, the Aviation and Railway Accident Investigation Board stated that both the CVR and FDR had stopped recording four minutes before the aircraft crashed.[79]
Why would the flight recorder stop recording after the bird strike? Don't they have backup battery for flight recorders? Ohanian (talk) 09:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Do you mean JeJu Air Flight 2216? Stanleykswong (talk) 14:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, you are right, flight 2216 not 2219. I have updated the title. Ohanian (talk) 14:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
It says on wikipedia that "With the reduced power requirements of solid-state recorders, it is now practical to incorporate a battery in the units, so that recording can continue until flight termination, even if the aircraft electrical system fails. ". So how can the CVR stop recording the pilot's voices??? Ohanian (talk) 10:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- The aircraft type was launched in 1994, this particular aircraft entered service in 2009. It may have had an older type of recorder.
- I too am puzzled by some aspects of this crash, but I'm sure the investigators will enlighten us when they're ready. PiusImpavidus (talk) 11:41, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Having looked into this briefly, it sounds like an independent power supply for the CVR (generally called a Recorder Independent Power Supply/RIPS) was only mandated for aircraft manufacturer from 2010 in the US [11] [12]. I doubt anyone else required them before. [13] So not particularly surprising if this aircraft didn't have one. I think, but am not sure, that even in the US older aircraft aren't required to be retrofitted with these newer recorders. (See e.g. [14] [15] [16].) In fact, the only regulator I could find with such a mandate is the Canadian one and that isn't until 2026 at the earliest [17]. Of course even if the FAA did require it, it's a moot point unless it was required for any aircraft flying to the US and this aircraft was flying to the US. I doubt it was required in South Korea given that it doesn't seem to be required in that many other places. There is a lot of confusing discussion about what the backup system if any on this aircraft would have been like [18] [19] [20]. The most I gathered from these discussions is that because the aircraft was such an old design where nearly everything was mechanical, a backup power supply wasn't particularly important in its design. The only expert commentary in RS I could find was in Reuters [21] "
a former transport ministry accident investigator, said the discovery of the missing data from the budget airline's Boeing 737-800 jet's crucial final minutes was surprising and suggests all power, including backup, may have been cut, which is rare.
" Note that the RIPS only have to work for 10 minutes, I think the timeline of this suggests power should not have been lost for 10 minutes at the 4 minutes point, but it's not something I looked in to. BTW, I think this is sort of explained in some of the other sources but if not see [22]. Having a RIPS is a little more complicated than just having a box with a battery. There's no point recording nothing so you need to ensure that the RIPS is connected to/powering mics in the cabin. Nil Einne (talk) 01:28, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Having looked into this briefly, it sounds like an independent power supply for the CVR (generally called a Recorder Independent Power Supply/RIPS) was only mandated for aircraft manufacturer from 2010 in the US [11] [12]. I doubt anyone else required them before. [13] So not particularly surprising if this aircraft didn't have one. I think, but am not sure, that even in the US older aircraft aren't required to be retrofitted with these newer recorders. (See e.g. [14] [15] [16].) In fact, the only regulator I could find with such a mandate is the Canadian one and that isn't until 2026 at the earliest [17]. Of course even if the FAA did require it, it's a moot point unless it was required for any aircraft flying to the US and this aircraft was flying to the US. I doubt it was required in South Korea given that it doesn't seem to be required in that many other places. There is a lot of confusing discussion about what the backup system if any on this aircraft would have been like [18] [19] [20]. The most I gathered from these discussions is that because the aircraft was such an old design where nearly everything was mechanical, a backup power supply wasn't particularly important in its design. The only expert commentary in RS I could find was in Reuters [21] "
- The aircraft made 13 flights in 48 hours, meaning less than 3.7 hours per flight. Is it too much? Its last flight from Bangkok to Korea had a normal flight time for slightly more than 5 hours. Does it mean the pilots had to rush through preflight checks? Stanleykswong (talk) 15:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- With this kind of schedule, it is questionable that the aircraft is well-maintained. Stanleykswong (talk) 15:32, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
The OP seems to be obsessed with creating a new conspiracy theory out of very little real information, and even less expertise. Perhaps a new hobby is in order? DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 19:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Just for info, the article is Jeju Air Flight 2216. This question has not yet been raised at the Talk page there. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- ...nor should it be, per WP:TALK. Shantavira|feed me 10:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- I disagree. It's quite a critical aspect in the investigation of the accident. Not sure it's some kind of "conspiracy", however. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- But I suggest it should only be raised if, and to the extent that, it is mentioned in Reliable sources, not OR speculated about by/in the Wikipedia article or (at length) the Talk page. On the Talk page it might be appropriate to ask if there are Reliable sources discussing it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.8.29.20 (talk) 10:53, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Quite. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:54, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Have now posed the question there. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- But I suggest it should only be raised if, and to the extent that, it is mentioned in Reliable sources, not OR speculated about by/in the Wikipedia article or (at length) the Talk page. On the Talk page it might be appropriate to ask if there are Reliable sources discussing it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.8.29.20 (talk) 10:53, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- I disagree. It's quite a critical aspect in the investigation of the accident. Not sure it's some kind of "conspiracy", however. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Fortune 500
[edit]Is there any site where one can view complete Fortune 500 and Fortune Global 500 for free? These indices are so widely used so is there such a site? --40bus (talk) 20:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- You can view the complete list here: https://fortune.com/ranking/global500/ Stanleykswong (talk) 21:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
January 12
[edit]Questions
[edit]- Why did the United Kingdom not seek euro adoption when it was in EU?
- Why did Russia, Belarus and Ukraine not join EU during Eastern Enlargement in 2004, unlike many other former Eastern Bloc countries?
- Why is Russia not in NATO?
- If all African countries are in AU, why are all European countries not in EU?
- Why Faroe Islands and Greenland have not become sovereign states yet?
- Can non-sovereign states or country subdivisions have embassies?
- Why French overseas departments have not become sovereign states yet? --40bus (talk) 13:35, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- I see that UCL offer a course on Modern European History & Politics. Had you considered that, perhaps? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:43, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- See: United Kingdom and the euro
- Russia, Belarus and Ukraine do not meet the criteria for joining the European Union
- If you google "Nato's primary purpose", you will know.
- The two do not have logical connection.
- They are too small to be an independent country
- Non-sovereign states or countries, for example Wales and Scotland, are countries within a sovereign state. They don't have embassies of their own.
- Unlike the British territories, all people living in the French territories are fully enfranchised and can vote for the French national assembly, so they are fully represented in the French democracy and do not have the need of becoming a sovereign state.
- Stanleykswong (talk) 15:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- I see that UCL offer a course on Modern European History & Politics. Had you considered that, perhaps? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:43, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Too many questions all at once… but to address the first with an overly simplistic answer: The British preferred the Pound. It had been one of the strongest currencies in the world for generations, and keeping it was a matter of national pride. Blueboar (talk) 14:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- 1. See United Kingdom and the euro
- 2. "... geopolitical considerations, such as preserving Russia’s status as a former imperial power, is more important to Moscow than economic issues when it comes to foreign policy. Russia’s sees [in 2004] relations with the EU to be much less important than bilateral relations with the EU member-states that carry the most political weight, namely France, Germany and, to some extent, Britain. Russia thus clearly emphasizes politics over economics. While NATO enlargement was seen by Moscow to be a very important event, Russia barely noticed the enlargement of the EU on May 1." Russia and the European Union (May 2004). See also Russia–European Union relations.
- 3. See Russia–NATO relations.
- Alansplodge (talk) 14:10, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Someone's bored again and expecting us to entertain them. Nanonic (talk) 15:59, 12 January 2025 (UTC)