Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

April 15

The royalty of Margia Dean, a railway baron, and a Greek regent

According to our article Margia Dean "her grandfather owned all of the railroads in Greece, her great great grandfather had rose [sic] to become the regent of Greece" and she was "of royal Greek descent". So who were her grandfather and great-great-grandfather, and did they really have such distinction? Was she of royal descent? The references used in our article are perhaps not of the best quality. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 01:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Gosh, what a mess. Her father, "Evangelis Skliris" appears to be unknown to Google outside of our article. Perhaps a transliteration error?

Railroads in Greece: History, Characteristics, and Forecasts says that the "Greek Railways Organization (OSE) was formed in 1970 and united a number of regional railroads, some dating back to 1884". This seems to cast doubt on their having been a single rail magnate in the country at any time.

Our List of regents of Greece starts with a couple of German princes, the only male Greek in the right timeframe is Pavlos Kountouriotis, who would have been 67 when Margia was born. Margia's paternal grandfather must have had the surname "Skliris", so that rules out the regent's son Theodoros, and one daughter married a chap called Alexis Stephanou, while the other was married to Emmanuel Lambrinoudis. [1] Of the other two native Greek regents, Georgios Kondylis was more notable as a general and prime minister, and Damaskinos of Athens was an Orthodox archbishop, so unlikely to be anybody's grandfather if he was behaving himself.

I thought perhaps it might have been Margia's maternal grandfather, but Margia's original surname was "Skliris-Alvarez", and Álvarez (surname) being Spanish, this seems infinitely improbable. Oops, Alvarez was her husband not her mother. I haven't been able to track down her mother at all.

So the whole claim seems to be somewhat lacking in veracity. Alansplodge (talk) 12:21, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I've found a Leonidas Skliris who was "the Czar of the Greeks", notorious padrone of immigrant Greek labourers on the railroads. He may be a red herring. DuncanHill (talk) 19:12, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, he has several Google results, including Leonidas Skliris called thief in fee exacted monthly from laborers. Plausibly, "boss of Greeks on the railroad" became "boss of railroads in Greece" in a sanitised family legend. Alansplodge (talk) 11:05, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

The major Greek railway companies in the 1920s were SPAP, a publicly traded company, and SEK, a public sector entity. Neither was largely owned by a single individual.  --Lambiam 20:04, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Family Search gives her parents as Evangelos George Skliris (1873-1927) and Dionysia Anastasia Kyriakopoulos (1887-1982). Evangelos' father is there named as George Nicholas Skliris. 194.223.53.134 (talk) 02:20, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Dating of The Parisian (Study of Ellen Andrée) by Édouard Manet

Both our article on Édouard Manet and the website of the hosting gallery Nationalmuseum,[2] date the painting The Parisian (synonymously referred to on Wikipedia as A Parisian Lady) to 1883. But, to me, this seems like a typo, as Manet was incapacitated and on his deathbed that year and wasn't known to have painted anything at that time, although, as I have just learned, he may have made up to four paintings until March of that year. Most other sources list dates like 1874-75, nothing that Manet intended to display The Parisian at the Salon of 1876. Strangely, the painting doesn't appear in some books about Manet in 1982, but does appear in 1995, so there must be some unusual history going on here. Which I don't understand because the Nationalmuseum has had it since 1917. I wonder if this is another case of Nazi art looting (was the painting stolen and recovered?) because the confusion over the dating and its elision from some art books in the 1980s doesn't make sense to me. Meanwhile, there's still the odd date to contend with. Was The Parisian reevaluated after 1995 and found to be a later painting, or is this just a typo by the gallery? The bio on Ellen Andrée implies she did most of her modeling for Manet in the 1870s. Viriditas (talk) 21:42, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

During WWII Sweden was neutral and never occupied. And according to this the picture was part of an exhibition in 1948. The same source dates it to 1875 based on an annotation by the son of Monet's "concubine" (and possibly Manet's son) on a photo of the painting. Too bad the museum gives no information on what they base their date on. Maybe this book has more information, but I have no access. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 14:58, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Apologies if I offended anyone. I didn’t mean to imply Sweden was occupied, but my understanding is that some paintings were lost or stolen when they were away from their hosting institutions during the war. I was wondering if the painting was traveling during that time. As you have shown, it was not. Thanks. I will try to find a copy of that book. Viriditas (talk) 20:08, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I wasn't offended at all. I just mentioned it to point out that Nazi looting while possible was not that likely in this case. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 20:14, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

This source states that there were two different women, one named Ellen Andrée, the other Ellen André, and that it is more likely that the latter was the model for the painting La parisienne in the Nationalmuseum. The dating 1875 is possibly based on the supposition that Ellen Andrée was the model. The title La parisienne has also been used in reference to other Manet paintings  --Lambiam 16:20, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

How confusing. I will follow up on this. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 20:08, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

That source refers to Ellen André as the daughter of Edmond André. Ellen Andrée was born as Hélène André and according to the French article on Ellen Andrée a note by Manet names Edmond André as her father. This suggests that there was some confusion created by the different spellings and that there was only one woman after all. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 20:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Which makes a crazy kind of sense as an explanation for the problem. So, it looks like the dating for the Nationalmuseum was wrong all along. The Fr wiki lists 1874 as the date, which aligns nicely with all the other sources on the subject. Still, this is such a strange mistake for a gallery to make that I'm wondering if we are only seeing a small part of the overall problem. Viriditas (talk) 21:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Curiouser and curiouser: art historian Michael Pantazzi writes in 1989: "Ellen Andrée was not the daughter of the painter Edmond André, Manet’s friend, as claimed by Rouart and Wildenstein".[3] So, back to square one. Pantazzi dates the painting in question to 1875-76. Viriditas (talk) 21:42, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

At this point, I'm convinced it's a typo by the Nationalmuseum. I reached this conclusion by noting that their own in-house bulletin confirms the date of the painting is 1876 ("Éduard Manet renders the background in Nationalmuseum’s A Parisian Lady from 1876"). That article was published in volume 23 of the Nationalmuseum Art Bulletin in 2016. Now, the question becomes how to get them to fix it. Viriditas (talk) 22:41, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Note, I sent them an email with all the relevant links. Viriditas (talk) 22:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

That really suggests that they don't disagree with everyone else about the date, but that someone accidentally enter the year of his death as the date for painting. That leaves the mystery of why some books don't mention it and of the one or two Ellens. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 22:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I found a source that lends additional insight into that mystery, but I neglected to mention it. It's Manet, 1832–1883 (1983), p. 432. Françoise Cachin writes: "Moreau-Nelaton's dating [of The Blonde with Bare Breasts, which he dates to 1875 instead of 1878] is based on association with La parisienne (RW I 236), which he believes to have been posed by the same model [Either Amélie-Jeanne or Marguerite, it's unclear]. But according to Mme Manet, Ellen Andrée posed for La parisienne. In any case, the style places the work [The Blonde with Bare Breasts] between 1875 and 1879. The hat also seems to be in the fashion of the late 1870s or early 1880s." Viriditas (talk) 23:16, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

The book Dictionary of Artists' Models has a biography of Ellen Andrée on pp.42ff  --Lambiam 07:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Great find, as usual. I will make sure to use that source next week when I start fixing these issues. Thanks, again. Viriditas (talk) 08:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

April 16

Eileen Aroon Words

Here is Mary O'Hara singing an irish folk song titled Eireen Aroon (or i think it's Eibhlin a Ruin in irish)

I barely know irish but it does appear that she is singing in irish/gaelic in this song. However, whenever i try to look for the lyrics, they are either in english (which it does not appear she is singing in) or it brings me lyrics that dont match. I would appreciate if anyone could help me find the correct irish lyrics or what she is saying!

I apepear to not be able to put the link so please just search mary o hara eileen arron

Thank you 95.12.121.44 (talk) 00:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Here is Irish Song Lyrics for: Aileen Aroon It seems to partially match "Eileen Aroon" by Mary O'Hara from Songs of Erin (1956), but not entirely. 136.56.52.157 (talk) 05:48, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Better source for same lyrics:[4] -- As sung by Mrs. Clive at ye Theatre Royal, London, ca. 1742 --136.56.52.157 (talk) 06:08, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

More versions here: [5] -- 136.56.52.157 (talk) 06:17, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

If you're subscribed to Spotify, you can allegedly see lyrics to "Eibhlín a Rún" by Mary O'Hara, from Sa Ghailearaí Náisiúnta (1987), here:[6]. --136.56.52.157 (talk) 07:00, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Hopefully I can find the first verse 95.12.121.44 (talk) 10:21, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Running-fight game in Italian

what is the Italian for Running-fight game? 89.97.104.35 (talk) 15:25, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Doing a quick search using Google, it looks like the name gioco di corsa e combattimento is used, but I'm not sure if it is an established name or just a direct automatic translation. --195.62.160.60 (talk) 07:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Calcio Fiorentino is similar in concept, no? --136.56.52.157 (talk) 19:06, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

The three-player "triangular backgammon" game TOP·3 is called here a gioco di percorso e cattura. The same term is used here for an Ancient Roman game Ludus Duodecim Scriptorum, said to be similar to the ancient Egyptian board game Senet and compared here to backgammon.  --Lambiam 10:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Did you actually have to "whack" someone to become a made man in the mafia?

I've recently foubnd myself going down a fairly interesting rabbithole on youtube involving former members of the mafia and their videos. Loads of aged mobsters have YouTube channels where they share stories, comment on whatever's in the news, review movies, hawk merchandise/great deals on VPNs and constatly trash talk each other.

Won't mention names becuase of BLP on here, but one guy was basically accusing another of being a nepotism hire who only got made as a favor to his father and implied that he'd never "made his bones" and that no-one took him seriously. Been doing a bit of reading around and I've read different accounts of whaether a killing was actually needed to prove one's loyalty, or that you're not a cop.

Anyone know? Or did it vary over time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.200.127.240 (talk) 21:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

How does one become a "former" member of the mafia? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:42, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Movies and tv shows told me that you can't just walk away, but in real life it doesn't seem to be black and white. Of course some of them ratted out their associates too and became famous because of that. idk, maybe they're too high profile for any comback or it happened so long ago that no-one cares any more as long as they're only talking ancient history. But "former mobster" does seem to be a thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.200.127.240 (talk) 21:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Just to add - after posting this a video turned up on my YouTube recs of some random guy talking crap about Sammy The Bull's mom. Truly this is a wonderful corner of the internet. We've come so far. Heheheh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.200.127.240 (talk) 23:01, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article on the term made man, which says that "Often, an associate is required to carry out a contract killing in order to become eligible...". Often, not always. Makes sense to me. No source is cited for the information, but some other items in the same paragraph are sourced to Underboss by Peter Maas. --174.89.12.187 (talk) 04:07, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

The rationality behind it has nothing to do with murder. As with any form of gang activity, members are required to commit a crime serious enough that they don't want to deal with the legal punishment. The gang now has evidence of the crime and can use it to control the member. In the Hollywood terms, the Mafia bosses tell the new guy that has to do what they say or they will turn him into the police for murder. 12.116.29.106 (talk) 15:48, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I always thought it was to prove that you weren't undercover police/a fed, the rationale being that law enforcement can't commit crimes when undercover. Can't remember where I read this (it was in an article years ago), but it was mentioned that sometimes they'd order you to "whack" someone and basically send you on a wild goose chase under false pretenses (while watching you) - just to see if you'd actually have been prepared to go through with it. As an aside, I've been browsing MafiaTube now. Here's Sammy The Bull and Michael Franzese promoting wine together on the internet. This really is kinda funny to see these old mobsters doing the social media influencer shuffle like everyone else. Haven't seen them shilling Ridge Wallets, Raid Shadow Legends or those Japanese chefs' knives yet, but I wouldn't be surprised. Iloveparrots (talk) 18:25, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

OP here. Did you ever watch The Mafia States of America? documentary? Sammy and Michael hated each other in that and nearly came to blows at one point. I wasn't sure how much of it was just kayfabe internet beef tho - it deffo could have been. But yeah, the Omerta is pretty much dead now we have guys like this beefing online for an appreciative audience, isn't it lol. 146.200.128.34 (talk) 20:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It is commonly believed that a law official cannot commit a crime and therefore you just ask them to do so and it proves that they are or are not a law official. That is untrue. Just as any other human can commit a crime and, if caught, suffer punishment, a law official can as well. It doesn't reduce evidence that the law official may find separate from committing a crime. Many people think that if you ask someone if they are police, they are required to tell you. That is not true either. Both of these are loosely based on entrapment laws. In books and movies, they are used as tropes to add suspense to legal dramas, knowing full well that they are not accurate. What a law official cannot do is push someone else to commit a crime. So, following the logic that you are trying to prove they are a cop, you don't ask them to kill someone. You ask them to make someone else kill someone. That is entrapment and they cannot do it. Technically, they can. They just can't arrest the person afterward because of the entrapment. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 22:34, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

April 18

Johnny Darvall - was he called Lawrence or Lawrance?

Our article is at Lawrence Darvall. His Death Notice in The Times spells him (and his son) "Lawrance", as does Dennis Wheatley in Stranger than Fiction, and various publications relating to his work for United World Colleges. Death notices are usually written by the family, and Wheatley counted him as a colleague and friend. The Times obituary has him as Lawrence, the Imperial War Museum "Lives of the First World War" project as "Lawrance", The National Portrait Gallery hedges its bets with "Sir Lawrance (Lawrence) Darvall". From a quick glance in the Gazette the e seems to be preferred officially. So - what was it? Which did he prefer? Why the difference? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 13:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Am sorry to complicate, but FYI his name was entered with a THIRD version - Laurence - in the birth register. View a scan at [7]. Perhaps someone with a paid geneology account can find the entry itself to confirm. I feel for him. It's hard being misspelled all your life. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 14:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Instead of trying to pick the one right version, wouldn't it be best to note the inconsistency and explain it (some sources use Lawrance, some Lawrence, some Laurence, etc) with cites for each. When reliable sources disagree, we report all of them, and note the disagreement. --Jayron32 14:47, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Still, some might be more correct than others. It is possible that he personally used another spelling than his official name; if we knew this to be the case (supported by reliable sources), it would be good to report it. How did he sign his letters? Darvall having been the recipient of a knighthood, becoming a Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath, there has to be some official record of this, which may be presumed to be more authoritative than a newspaper report. Among the many data points: the NATO Defense College, in a list of its commandants, lists him as Air Marshal Sir Lawrence Darvall.^[8]  --Lambiam 16:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

How do you decide if some sources are more correct than others? --Jayron32 17:52, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

There is no general procedure, but, for instance, an official death certificate, or a contemporaneous newspaper article reporting on someone's death, are generally more trustworthy sources for a date of death than a random mention in a book. With personal given names, there is often a discrepancy between someone's official name, as given on identity documents such as passports, and the name by which they are commonly referred to. Newspaper articles will use the name Greg Abbott for the current governor of Texas, whose official name is Gregory Wayne Abbott. It would be ridiculous to report that some sources use "Greg" while others have "Gregory".  --Lambiam 08:29, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses.. Also, per WP:UCN, we don't give any special credence to "official" records on these matters. For example, actor Sean Bean is, on "official documents", "Shaun Bean", and we don't ignore the discrepancy or refuse to mention the use of both spellings. Similarly, the Wikipedia article on the person above, while we would possibly want to remain consistent in usage and pick one of the names, should also explain that source documents vary in their spellings. --Jayron32 11:09, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

We do not write, "some sources use Sean, some Shaun".  --Lambiam 22:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Because all sources use Sean, except the narrow ones related to official documents. The Lawrence/Laurence/Lawrance case above is different. We don't have evidence which of the three was in use commonly, as it appears they all may have been. --Jayron32 12:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Who were the true villains in the Vietnam War?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Who were the true villains in the Vietnam War, the United States or North Vietnam and Viet Cong? 95.144.204.68 (talk) 17:12, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

See above. In the instructions for this page, it says We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate. --Jayron32 17:51, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

April 19

Witness not permitted to give sworn testimony

I'm reading a novel translated from Swedish and set there. The narrator is summoned to appear as a witness in a trial in which his daughter is charged with murder, but because of his close personal connection with her he is not permitted to take the oath. He still must answer the questions put to him, though.

Is this procedure common? If it was revealed that some answer he gave was untruthful, would that be grounds for perjury, or just for contempt of court? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

While not knowing anything specific about Swedish criminal procedure, I have to say that this does not make sense to me. Dramatic licence?  --Lambiam 08:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

IANAL but it makes sense to me. Having a close personal connection, their testimony could be biased. It would be more objective if they simply answered specific questions. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:09, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Anybody's testimony can be biased for a variety of reasons. The oath does not mean much more than a promise to present things as truthfully as one can.  --Lambiam 21:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

This says:

• In Sweden we have a general obligation to give evidence. This means that anyone with significant knowledge relating to an investigation is obliged to testify in court if the prosecutor or the defendant or the defence counsel deem it necessary. So, as a private individual you are not at liberty to decide whether or not you wish to give evidence. Exceptions are only granted to those who, for example, are closely related to the suspect.

But choosing whether or not you wish to testify is a different matter from giving unsworn testimony. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:41, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

There is an article on spousal privilege. It does not contain any data on Scandinavian proceedings but there may be useful references to Anglo-Saxon usage. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 09:19, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure (pdf), chapter 36, section 13: "Nor may in criminal cases an oath be taken by a person related to the defendant." I must admit, I don't understand why being related to someone relieves them of the obligation to take an oath. --Viennese Waltz 09:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't see it as relieving them, rather as disqualifying them. DuncanHill (talk) 21:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Read in combination with section 11, I interpret this as implying that persons related to the defendant cannot give testimony in criminal cases.  --Lambiam 21:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Whereas, in my novel - which I acknowledge may not stick closely to actual Swedish court procedure - he is compelled to give evidence, but not permitted to take the oath. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 03:55, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't think that's right. Section 3 says that relatives of the defendant are not obliged to testify, not that they are disqualified from doing so. --Viennese Waltz 06:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

They are not disqualified in civil cases, but then they are (like all witnesses giving testimony) required to take an oath. They are not obliged to take an oath, but then they can also not testify in the case.  --Lambiam 09:43, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Under the old legal rules of "coverture", in many cases a husband and wife were not allowed to testify for or against each other (the person who accused Jane Austen's aunt Jane Leigh-Perrot of shoplifting seems to have very carefully taken this into account when making the accusation). But I doubt that it has much to do with the Swedish thing... AnonMoos (talk) 22:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

How reliable are these sources?

[9], [10] Are both these sources useful for the Alan Singh article? -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 09:17, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

You may want to ask at WP:RSN instead; that's a more appropriate forum for analyzing the reliability of sources. --Jayron32 11:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

What is St Alphege carrying?

Today is the feast of Ælfheah (or Alphege) of Canterbury. Looking for an image to add to his article, I found this statue of him at Salisbury Cathedral, but what is he carrying in his robe? Some sort of hexagonal boxes? Any ideas? Alansplodge (talk) 18:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

The rocks the drunken Danes threw at him? This thesis discusses some of the iconography associated with him in various stained glass window depictions, based on his various miracles/his life story. It mentions a depiction of him with rocks and bones piled at his feet to represent his manner of death. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 19:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

(e/c) According to this book, "In portraitures he is frequently depicted with his chasuble full of stones, in allusion to the first part of his martyrdom", i.e. he was stoned by Danes before being finished off with an axe blow. --Antiquary (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, it's probably the stones that were used to kill him. But it might be hot cross buns, which would be tastier. Girth Summit _(blether) 22:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Or rock cakes. DuncanHill (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks all. Stones it is. They look a bit too regular, but perhaps those Vikings were choosey about their missiles. Apparently, they also threw a cow's head at him, but that would look silly. Alansplodge (talk) 16:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Image and ref now added to article. Alansplodge (talk) 16:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Resolved

April 20

First Worl War and Second World War having effect on colonial rule

Did both World wars destroy the British empire and French empire?
There are lots of debate over Mahtama Gandhi being branded as Father of the Nation in India.
Without the two world wars, what if British had enough money and soldiers?
Not just India, but other Asian, African countries under British, French, Belgian rule?
Would the independence have been after few decades? Imagine British and French army not suffering so many deaths.

Another thing I don't understand, why First World War has no villain like Hitler.

And always the atrocities, massacres, torture, mass rapes by Japanese army is not discussed that much. Hollywood World War movies are always on Germans, not Japanese. So Second World War must be having other Japanese ruler who was bad like Hitler. Arjun Singh 2004 (talk) 05:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

WW1 didn't have much effect on overseas colonies other than transferring some colonies (mainly German) to different powers, and the setting up of League of Nations mandates. (It did break up the Russian Empire in eastern Europe.) WW2 definitely had an effect -- India and Pakistan became independent a little more than two years after the end of the war. Western and Central European powers were much less dominant in world affairs in 1946 than they had been in 1913. Mahatma Gandhi adopted a rather stupid approach to World War 2, launching the Quit India Movement even though Britain simply was not going to "quit India" while fighting an epic struggle for its very national survival, and Britain was less constrained by international public opinion than at some other times. Pakistan might never even have come into existence if not for the Quit India Movement... AnonMoos (talk) 06:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

And the Ottoman colonies in the Middle East were appropriated by Britain and France as mandates; we're still trying to sort that one out. Alansplodge (talk) 16:41, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

P.S. Japan didn't have an evil dictator (though Americans during WW2 certainly hated both Hirohito and Hideki Tojo), but it had cliques of militarists whose policies certainly had some evil aspects by the 1930s... Empire of the Sun (film) and Bridge on the River Kwai are ablout the Japanese in WW2. AnonMoos (talk) 06:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

In an alternate history without the Quit India Movement and the 1947 Partition of India, a likely scenario is an ensuing bloody civil war following the creation of an undivided Republic of India, spurred by both the All-India Muslim League and the Pakistan Movement, only ending with the secession of Pakistan.  --Lambiam 09:38, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

• I wouldn't be so strong on the notion that the end of World War I as having no effect on the end of colonialism. Several of the Fourteen Points proposed by Woodrow Wilson at the end of the war dealt with self-determination, including points V (rights of people in having a say in their own governance), VI (keeping outside interests out of Russia during the Civil War, i.e. let Russia sort itself out), VII (condemnation of the occupation of Belgium), VIII (return of occupied French territory to France), IX (Italian borders should be drawn to include all and only Italian people), X (rights of the dismantled parts of Austria-Hungary to self-determination), XI (Rights of the Balkan nations to same), XII (rights of the dismantled Ottoman Empire to the same), XIII (rights of newly constituted Poland to same). Sadly, this emphasis was meant in practice to mean "Only white people", as there was little energy towards extending the concepts of self-determination to non-white peoples. Famously, Ho Chi Minh led a delegation representing the interests of French Indochina, to the Paris peace talks, and was summarily rebuffed. Ostensibly, it was because of their socialist leanings, but in the face of Point VI (where Wilson specifically spoke against outside action against the Bolsheviks), that seems like a hollow rationale; it's rather baldly true that there were two sets of standards for "self-determination" at the time. If your "colony" was white people who spoke a different language, give them their own country. If your "colony" was anyone else, tough shit. --Jayron32 12:33, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

The British master-plan for India was to eventually create a self-governing Indian Federation with dominion status, i.e. with a governor-general but retaining the king as head of state, like Canada and Australia. It was hoped that the federation would be dominated by conservative Hindus and the rulers of the Princely States, so that there would be no radical departure from British imperial policies. The Government of India Act 1935 was an attempt to lay the groundwork for that, but even if the war had not put an end to this scheme, it seems likely that it would have failed messily.

The British, French and Dutch empires in southeast Asia became unviable after the war, after the colonial powers had proved incapable of defending them. Alansplodge (talk) 16:58, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Something similar, I suspect, could be said of American sovereignty over the Commonwealth of the Philippines (1935-46): that the U.S. couldn't protect them, although several steps towards anticipated self-government and independence had been taken before Pearl Harbor.

On the other hand, although Britain could not protect Singapore or Malaya, she (with Australia and other countries) fought a bitter anti-Communist struggle in Malaya, ending (for Britain if not Malaya) with the formation of the independent Federation of Malaya in 1957 (united with Singapore — briefly — Sarawak and British North Borneo — Sabah — in the Federation of Malaysia in 1963. —— Shakescene (talk) 18:51, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Maybe Hollywood makes more movies about Germany than about Japan because a greater number of Hollywood actors can pass as Germans than as Japanese. —Tamfang (talk) 03:07, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

April 21

E. C. Mountford or E. C. Mountfort?

We have several Victorian cartoons, in the category c:Category:E. C. Mountford (linked to the Wikidata item E. C. Mountfort (Q64767592)); their descriptions vary between the above spellings. External sources vary, also. Can we find a definitive source, and clear up the confusion?

Do we know his (presumably not her?) first names? Or anything else about him? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:36, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Mountfort for the Brum cartoonist, who worked for The Dart and illustrated Richard Tangye's Reminiscences of Travel in Australia, America, and Egypt. But I can't find forenames or a definitive source. DuncanHill (talk) 15:54, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Looks like he was Ernest Chesmer (some sources have Chester, I think a transcription error), born Edgbaston. Wife's name Mary Jane, married 1874 in King's Norton. But that would count as OR for Wikipedia purposes. Probably of the firm of Mountfort, fancy goods dealers of New Street, Birmingham. DuncanHill (talk) 16:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Is "given deserved consideration" in Roberts, Stephen; Ward, Roger (2014). Mocking Men of Power: Comic Art in Birmingham 1861-1911. Birmingham Biographies. ISBN 1502764563.. The Dart archives appear to be in the Birmingham and Midland Institute. DuncanHill (talk) 16:21, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Also named as Ernest Chesmer Mountfort in Jones, Aled (2002). "The "Dart" and the Damning of the Sylvan Stream: Journalism and Political Culture in the Late-Victorian City". Victorian Periodicals Review. 35 (1): 2–17.. That's on JSTOR, so you should probably be able to get it via the Wikipedia Library. DuncanHill (talk) 16:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Mentioned here "received his early education at the South Kensington School of Art" and also worked for The Graphic and The Daily Graphic. DuncanHill (talk) 18:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Excellent. Thank you, Duncan. Jones' paper is interesting. The Tangye work is here, BTW. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Jones cites an Obituary for Mountfort, Birmingham Mail 2 June 1922, but BNA does not seem to have it, sadly. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:45, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Probabte record, "Mountfort Ernest Chesmer of 36 Carlyle-road Edgbaston Birmingham died 31 May 1922 Probate Birmingham 17 June to Mary Jane Mountfort widow. Effects £619 7s 11d"

Old custom of suitor hiding in attic…

There is an old (I think Indian) custom where the suitor hides in the attic and listens to the female that lives there and goes through steps to se how compatible she would be as a wife. It includes her also chasing him around and a couple of other things that I can’t remember. I only remember that there’s a documentary where this custom is mentioned. I would not be asking for a reference to this if I hadn’t already googled this to death (as well trying to get a man out of my attic, yes I’ve called the cops). Also, no I did NOT agree to this. Any more information would be very helpful to me. Thank you.Abreedlove0715 (talk) 22:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

0.08

Why is the legal limit .08? Why not .07 or .06? Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 23:02, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I assume you're referring to blood alcohol, and driving motor vehicles. But you must be aware the legal limit varies from place to place, and you don't say which jurisdiction you're wanting to know about. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:06, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Such legally defined limits are usually the result of a compromise between those who wish to see lower limits (perhaps even 0.00% BAC) and those who prefer higher limits. A scientific study with a clear recommendation may help to reach a conclusion – either side can use it to argue that the other side's proposed limit is unreasonably high or low. A not totally clear recommendation was offered in a 1964 risk study funded by the US public health service and the Licensed Beverage Industries of New York, commonly referred to as the "Grand Rapids" study.^[11] Quoting from the abstract: "Blood alcohol concentrations (BACs) over 0.04% are definitely associated with an increased accident rate. The probability of accident involvement increases rapidly at BACs over 0.08%, and becomes extremely high at BACs above 0.15%." This was a strong weapon against advocates for a higher limit than 0.08%, but kept the field open for advocating for a lower limit. A 1995 study, "Grand Rapids Effects Revisited",^[12] conveniently stated, "Thus, countermeasures directed at those persons driving at BACs higher than 0.08% can be expected to be most effective in reducing the number of accidents attributable to the effects of alcohol. In contrast, measures directed at drivers with BACs less than 0.08% cannot be very effective. At most, 4% of all accidents attributable to the effects of alcohol may be prevented." (Never mind that the first study was based on US data and the second on German data, countries with very different driving behaviours.) This kind of disarmed advocates for lower limits, although (IMO) a preventable 4% of a very high number is high enough not to give up.  --Lambiam 06:57, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

April 22

Smallest constituent of the Russell 2000

Hi. What is the smallest company by market cap in the Russell 2000? It is easy to find the largest ($7.8 billion), average ($2.9 billion) and median ($1.0 billion), but I cannot find the market capitalization of the smallest component of the index. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 13:22, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Eikou no Napoleon - Eroica

Rosalie works as a seamstress in an atelier named Maison Guinan, or also "La Rose de Guinan", in Place Vendôme, Paris. Can you find if it was a real-life or fictional place? Thank you.