Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:24, 10 August 2023

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/H

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.

August 3

Lord Camelford's body

Thomas Pitt, 2nd Baron Camelford wanted to be buried on the Île Saint-Pierre in Switzerland, but he ended up at St Anne's, Soho, and despite the efforts of his friend Devereux, there he remained. According to Tolstoy, Nikolai (1978). The Half-Mad Lord - Thomas Pitt, 2nd Baron Camelford. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. p. 194. ISBN 0-03-047261-X. he should still (in 1978) be there, towards the eastern end of the north vault. Our article on him however says his body "disappeared without explanation. This became the object of humour, with wits merrily quipping What has become of Lord Camelford's body?, sourced (at least the disappearence) to "The Passing Parade – John Doremus. Evenings with George Illich, Radio 2CH, 20:40 30 November 2009". So - did it disappear ant Tolstoy missed it? Or is it still there, beneath the rebuilt church, or were the vaults excavated during the reconstruction in the 1990s? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 00:42, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Charles Reade's question "What Has Become of Lord Camelford's Body?" of 1876 was answered and he published again in 1884 stating "he had been informed that the coffin was still there"[1]. Can't find Reade's 1884 piece, J. H. Cardwell's 1910 "still somewhere in the North Vault, no one knows where" (OCLC 1166891619) nor the 1913 Soho Monthly Paper, but various assertions that the coffin with or without covering fish basket is still there 1877 1895 1906 1921. fiveby(zero) 02:17, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Crypts of London has: Beneath the church was the empty south vault, together with the north vault and the chancel vault, both of which had been crushed by landmines and seriously affected by water seepage. In 1974 part of the roof of the north vault collapsed...It was found that all the coffins were squashed together but 178 still had their breastplates. Exhumation began on 27 November 1987 and ended on 19 March 1988, during which 152 deteriorated lead coffins, twenty-six dilapidated wood coffins and around 4,500 skeletons were removed to the City of London Cemetery...There was much press publicity before the project began due to the possibility of finding the remains of the eccentric Lord Camelford, a young Regency rake who had died in a duel. He had been interred in the north vault on 17 March 1804, but no trace of him was found. Johnson, Malcolm (2013). Crypts of London (ebook ed.). New York: The History Press. pp. 178–9. OCLC 867926163. fiveby(zero) 03:55, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like there were plans for an autopsy: Barker, Felix (January 20, 1986). "Soho's roaring boy: was he a secret agent?". Evening Standard. Rogers, Byron (March 23, 1986). "Digging up the truth?". Sunday Telegraph. fiveby(zero) 04:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Landmines? German bombs, I could believe, but who plants landmines in a London church? Card Zero (talk) 07:24, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, landmines. The term was applied to Parachute mines which were naval mines dropped by parachute. See the end of ¶4 in §Luftwaffe where it is referenced by Rattigan (2005). On a personal note, my mother was a schoolgirl in Coventry during the blitz and on one occasion a landmine fell in her road but the parachute was caught in a tree and it didn't explode. She was in the vicinity at the time and if it had have detonated she would probably been killed. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:06, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They were twice the size of the largest conventional bombs used during the Blitz, so any very large explosion was attributed to them. Alansplodge (talk) 11:21, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"any very large explosion was attributed to them" – that may well be true, but I suspect that the people that had actual experience of them both as UXBs and as explosions would have a pretty good idea. The fact that the Army were advised to seek naval help in defusing them lends credence to contemporary reports. Still at this distance with nearly all the people concerned dead we have to rely on written accounts so you could be right. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:44, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right. Many had long time delay fuzes which may have caused more disruption than the actual explosion. Alansplodge (talk) 13:51, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find that Tolstoy published anything post non-exhumation, nor Elizabeth Sparrow her planned biography. Maybe in Secret service : British agents in France, 1792-1815 with the "absolute, infallible proof...that he was involved in a counter-revolutionary movement abroad" and further speculation? fiveby(zero) 15:04, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, have requested that through the library. Would buy it secondhand but prices are too high. DuncanHill (talk) 10:55, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hope i didn't send you on a wild goose chase, just noticed "Secret Service under Pitt's Administrations, 1792–1806"JSTOR 24423880 with no mention of Thomas and none in reviews of the book. She notes he was the reason for her earlier Alien Office papers but maybe dropped the theories altogether? fiveby(zero) 16:02, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

La Vie de Félix et Marie Bracquemond

Resolved

Hello, I am looking for a copy (either online or offline in published form) of an unpublished short biography titled La Vie de Félix et Marie Bracquemond by Marie Bracquemond's son, Pierre Bracquemond. Many of the writers who have published books and articles about Bracquemond refer to it, but I'm curious where they are finding it to draw from in their work, as I would also like to look at it. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 02:30, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Excerpts in Bouillon, Jean-Paul; Kane, Elizabeth (1984). "Marie Bracquemond". Woman's Art Journal. 5 (2). JSTOR 1357962. was all i could find for the Birth year of Marie Bracquemond. fiveby(zero) 03:10, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Any idea where these people are finding the original? Would it be held by an academic or art institution, such as papers or archives? Viriditas (talk) 03:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have that article. Footnote nine says the manuscript is in a private collection in Paris. Forgive me, but it’s 2023 now, and nobody has bothered to make it available to researchers? Viriditas (talk) 03:53, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

fr:Jean-Paul Bouillon has more snippets in "An Artistic Collaboration: Bracquemond and Baron Vitta" JSTOR 25159646. And the most complete description: See Pierre Bracquemond's MS. "Vie de Felix et Marie Bracquemond," April 23, 1925, 145 pages, private collection, Paris. While the manuscript is not accurate for the early periods and is inaccurate on the dates of specific works, it contains numerous firsthand references for the years Pierre Bracquemond (who was born in 1870) spent with his parents until their deaths in 1914 and 1916. fiveby(zero) 05:16, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, as that answers my question. Viriditas (talk) 05:55, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15th-century green French wigs

I'm intrigued by the two characters at the front of this illustration. The one on the right is dressed all in green, including green shoes and green hair. We can see that this is a wig, because the one on the left has taken his green wig off and is holding it. Their coats also have hairy green fringes. What are their roles, why are they dressed in such a peculiar way? I guess they're footmen, but that doesn't explain all the green hair. I'm reasonably familiar with the fashion of the 15th century - the event is actually 14th century but I think we can rely on old paintings to anachronistically reflect the fashion the painter was familiar with - isn't this about a hundred years too early for the revival of wigs? Card Zero (talk) 09:25, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have a feeling that this is more about the colors available to the painter than the actual livery colors of the tunic, tights, and wigs of men guiding the horse litter. I believe it is meant to indicate fancy dress of relatively high status. The Emperor was suffering from gout and needed a horse litter since it was the least bumpy mode of transport available at the time. I gleaned this from this contemporary source; https://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/gallica/Chronologie/14siecle/Memoire/mem_text.html which had Google Translate throwing fits. Scroll down for more images of green and red costumes. Abductive (reasoning) 10:08, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To me, the thing that the fellow on the left is holding looks more like a headscarf than a wig. Why would he take off a wig? Taking off a hat or similar is a sign of respect, but a wig? Also, he has a full head of natural hair, whereas wigs would rather go with a shaven head, wouldn't they? --Wrongfilter (talk) 10:23, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point: one element of late medieval fashion was the detached hood (like a ski mask). Perhaps what I'm seeing here is a fabric used for their coats and hoods, which happens to be painted similarly to hair - or was deliberately made to be similar to hair, since the headgear of the guy on the right has tresses and a parting. Card Zero (talk) 10:36, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a chaperon like this one, which in "the middle of the 15th century... had become common wear for males in the upper and middle classes". The chap on the left is showing what our article calls a "padded circular bourrelet" or headband. The hanging cloth part is called a "tippet or liripipe". Alansplodge (talk) 11:12, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

... because of course it is. Plausible! This explains the hoop-like component of the one being held. My intrigue is satisfied.

Resolved

Card Zero (talk) 12:46, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, I just Googled "15th century hat" and looked through the image results. Alansplodge (talk) 13:47, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In case the green is not merely a limited artist's palette, it made me think of Green man and Wild man (autotranslate of French version here). Cf this painting from 1475 Germany. Not sure if any green man connection re January 3, 1378 in Paris though. Were green folk part of the Saint Genevieve tradition at all? 70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:43, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The notion of such whiffler as explained in the Green man article might make sense. Looking full view at our heading green man he is probably about to take his position on the other side of the leading horse. The train is already halted if the other driver - I'm uncertain regarding the depiction - is a that precise moment inviting or saluting the ~~king~~ emperor. Thus his partner is not one of those who will be helping the king- Emperor step out of the litter. --Askedonty (talk) 17:17, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you wondered, the Emperor in the picture is emperor of all this. (But only visiting France.) Card Zero (talk) 18:30, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a caricaturist emeritus what I was wondering about is merely the incredible stability of the ethnical types those paintings are allowing us to consider throughout the ages. --Askedonty (talk) 18:36, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Much cloning went on, because of pattern books, as mentioned here. We lack an article on these (our article pattern book is about 19th century architects). Card Zero (talk) 18:59, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That picture is of a wedding, which makes it charivari. This custom (in its early form as a wedding celebration) involved people dressing up in greenery as wild men, as at the tragic Bal des Ardents, where the young Charles VI, the son of Charles V of France who provided the litter for Holy Roman Emperor Charles IV in the first picture, was among the dancers. This is an old wedding custom with presumably pagan roots. The possibility did cross my mind, though, I must admit, just because the guy is so very green. Card Zero (talk) 17:31, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of richest Americans in history

I'm confused. How come the richest American in history is Rockefeller? His net worth is $41 billion adjusted to 2022. Elon Musk's net worth is currently $239 billion in 2023. If anything, the richest American ever in history should be Elon Musk. What am I missing? 2600:6C44:117F:95BE:F0BC:29A3:B1EA:9563 (talk) 20:09, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to this Rockefeller peaked at $318 billion (adjusted to 2007). -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 21:35, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I read once that Rockefeller was worth 1% of the entire United States, in current terms that puts him at about twice Musk. Abductive (reasoning) 06:17, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That $318 billion figure is apparently not an inflation adjustment to 2007, but adjusted by "GDP percentage" (as stated in the source: "But the richest man in the entire history is John Rockefeller, if we measure its status as a percentage of U.S. GDP."). So who was the richest person when only adjusting for inflation, not for GDP percentage? Roentgenium111 (talk) 13:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 4

Notable Black Utilitarians and/or Consequentialists

I request a list of philosophers in the Consequentialist tradition who are members of the African Diaspora, including ones with Wikipedia articles and others with some academic publishing credits. Ideally, list those who are explicitly identified as such and came chronologically after J.S Mill, though this is not necessary. Mach61 (talk) 01:50, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If they are not explicitly identified as such in reliable sources and also do not self-identify as such, putting such labels on a philosopher (or anyone) qualifies as original research, not a Good Thing here. --Lambiam 15:08, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most of us are - as per current consensus - members of the African diaspora. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:25, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All indicators until now appear rather negative. After looking up Wikipedia categories you will otherwise find: "Typically contrasted with deontological/Kantian and consequentialist/utilitarian ethics, care ethics is found to have affinities with moral perspectives such as African ethics, Confucian ethics, .." (Care Ethics ). Consequentialist is commonly equated with "Kantian" in such matters. So an apparently fundamental disparity, and not an isolated opinion, it is also put into perpective here in Black Radical Kantianism. Unless I'm too optimistic peer reviewed Res Philosophica Black Radical Kantianism shouldn't be forgeting to mention the notable references to the condition, even though those were not radical, thus I'm inclined to conclude there are none. There are, otherwise, people such as the Dr Silas Modiri Molema who may have been using the word utilitarian once in their argumentation, I'm reading it in its first Wiktionary sense wikt:utilitarian as the term was associated with "morality", not with "ethics", originally. Note that maximisation can be easily contrasted with liberation [2], [3]. --Askedonty (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Consequentialist is commonly equated with 'Kantian' in such matters." That directly contradicts the quote preceding it. Kant is thoroughly anti-consequentialist. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 18:57, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see them above together contrasted against care ethics. Rule consequentialism I think is what is contrasted to Kant’s deontological ethics. --Askedonty (talk) 19:18, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The quote contrasts care ethics to both deontological/Kantian and consequentialist/utilitarian ethics, but as a third option. For Kant consequences of actions are completely irrelevant to their moral status. From the beginning of the first section of the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals:

"Nothing can possibly be conceived in the world, or even out of it, which can be called good, without qualification, except a Good Will."

[...]

"A good will is good not because of what it performs or effects, not by its aptness for the attainment of some proposed end, but simply by virtue of the volition; that is, it is good in itself, and considered by itself is to be esteemed much higher than all that can be brought about by it in favour of any inclination, nay even of the sum total of all inclinations. Even if it should happen that, owing to special disfavour of fortune, or the niggardly provision of a step-motherly nature, this will should wholly lack power to accomplish its purpose, if with its greatest efforts it should yet achieve nothing, and there should remain only the good will (not, to be sure, a mere wish, but the summoning of all means in our power), then, like a jewel, it would still shine by its own light, as a thing which has its whole value in itself. Its usefulness or fruitfulness can neither add nor take away anything from this value. It would be, as it were, only the setting to enable us to handle it the more conveniently in common commerce, or to attract to it the attention of those who are not yet connoisseurs, but not to recommend it to true connoisseurs, or to determine its value."[4]

Kant famously even goes as far as saying that you have to return a weapon to a person who gave it to you for safe-keeping even if that person is completely out of their mind and about to go killing people. Or in another example, where someone is seeking sanctuary with you, when their persecutors come asking where they are you have to tell them, basically making you an accessory to murder. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 19:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Being ignorant of Kant state of mind at that point, I'll hazard it can be very easy to build other paradoxes and reverse the logic of any interpretation at this point. For example were there is shininess, there could arise blindness too. At any rate, the question was already disputed in the past and remains so, as far as I can see [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13]. Also [14]. --Askedonty (talk) 20:30, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

.

Alumni Oxonienses citation of "Robinson"

A number of entries in the Alumni Oxonienses (e.g. this one [15]) cite a source called "Robinson". Who/what is this Robinson source? Muzilon (talk) 03:59, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see a Rev J. C. Robinson mentioned in the preface as editing the register of Merchant Taylors' School (I assume the London one). Your example came from Middlesex, and London is in Middlesex. Perhaps page 241 of whatever work "Robinson" is will tell you what it said about him in that school register. In fact here it is: A register of the scholars admitted into Merchant Taylors' School : from A. D. 1562 to 1874. (And here is Volume 2.) The information given in the case of the example is Henry Scotland, (footnote: Member of the Legislative Council, New Zealand) b. ii July, 1821, s. of George and Sarah, barrister, Harpur Street. Card Zero (talk) 06:48, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you, very helpful. Muzilon (talk) 04:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speed limits before the speedometer

The first speedometer was patented in 1888, and reportedly they started to be available as options in the early 20th century.

The first speed limit was set by the Locomotive Act of 1861. The famous arrests of Ulysses S. Grant for speeding are from 1866 and 1872.

How were drivers since 1861, and Grant in particular, expected to know when to slow down, decades before the availability of the speedometer? 147.234.72.52 (talk) 17:40, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speed limit enforcement, section History, notes The act required a man with a red flag to walk 60 yards (55 m) ahead ... The speed limit was effectively redundant as vehicle speeds could not exceed the speed at which a person could walk. Card Zero (talk) 18:16, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Position two officers on a road, 50 yards from each other. The first officer raises a flag when a mechanically propelled vehicle passes by, whereupon the second officer starts a stopwatch and stops it on the arrival of the vehicle. If the elapsed time was less than 20 seconds, the vehicle exceeded a speed of 5 mph. --Lambiam 00:13, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

British police speed traps were still conducted this way in the 1960s, although the mode of communication had moved on. Alansplodge (talk) 10:40, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to VASCAR, even now some speed traps are still done in a somewhat similar manner albeit only requiring one observer. Most automated systems have tended to use an almost instantaneous speed using on device at almost a single point. But especially with Automatic number plate recognition, there's a move back to average speed measurements using 2 cameras between fixed points with known distances e.g. SPECS (speed camera) in the UK, in large part to deal with the tendency of people to slow down where they know there's a camera but drive faster elsewhere. Although I think these tend to take the speeds over a far greater distance then the police generally did manually. (AFAIK, they also rely on precisely synchronised clocks more than real time communication.) Nil Einne (talk) 15:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Horse gait also indicates some methods that police officers could have used in cases like Grant's, which involved horse drawn carriages. Horses naturally, without training, have four different gaits, which are walk, trot, canter and gallop, in order of increasing speed. A horse that was walking on city streets was not breaking 19th century speed limits. A horse in a full gallop almost certainly was. Cullen328 (talk) 01:26, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense, or at least more sense than a horse rider memorizing landmark distances and continually consulting a stopwatch. Trying to find out about pre-automobile speed limits, I found one author saying that Grant promised "to stick to the speed limit in future", which is vague, and another claim that the town marshal in Tuscon, Arizona, enforced a speed limit of 5 miles per hour for horses - but this is part of a "strange story and amazing fact" in which the marshal stopped a self-appointed judge, who then fined himself. Speed limit has a reference for the first numeric speed limit for automobiles, but leaves the question of a numeric speed limit for horses unanswered. In the history section however it mentions laws about "riding at a gallop" and the unspecific "furious driving", and that sounds more practical. Card Zero (talk) 09:19, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The first recorded instance of a speed trap can be traced back to the early 20th century in the United Kingdom. Picture this: it’s 1896, and Walter Arnold is cruising through Paddock Wood, Kent, in his horseless carriage, breaking the dizzying speed limit of 2 mph. However, little did he know that a vigilant police officer on a bicycle was observing his mischievous behaviour, armed with nothing more than a stopwatch. [16]

Presumably, the policeman was able to keep up with the speeding vehicle on his bicycle. Alansplodge (talk) 10:47, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The same case is described in more detail here. The fine for speeding was one shilling (5 new pence) although there were two other related fines and costs. Alansplodge (talk) 10:54, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He must have been travelling faster than the speed of light if 1896 was part of the 20th century. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:26, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yet, in all versions of the story, Grant's violations are referred to as speeding rather than galloping; and he was known to keep and drive exceptionally fast horses, so he might be able to exceed the speed limit without galloping.

Where could one find the traffic code which was in effect in DC in 1866-1872, in order to see exactly how Grant's violation was defined? 147.234.72.52 (talk) 17:04, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Failed to find that, but did find a statute of 1892:

Sect. 12: That it shall not be lawful for any person or persons to ride or drive any animal of the horse kind in or on any street , avenue , or alley of the cities of Washington or Georgetown at a rate of speed exceeding eight miles per hour, nor cause any such animal to turn any corner within the said cities at a rate of speed exceeding four miles per hour.

The Washington Law Reporter: Volume 20 (1893) p. 662

A brisk walking speed is 4 mph. while a middle-aged jogger (such as myself) would consider 8 mph a steady pace, so I suppose it would be a simple matter for a policeman on foot to tell if that were being exceded by any reasonable margin. Alansplodge (talk) 22:37, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At a trot, a horse-drawn carriage will go around 8-10 MPH. At a walk, a horse-drawn carriage will go about 2-4 MPH... When at the canter, a horse-drawn carriage goes approximately 10-15 MPH. At the gallop, the speed will be around 18-25 MPH. [17] Alansplodge (talk) 23:08, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Grammatically correct?

We are working on an obituary. There is a difference of opinion over whether the following (part of a) sentence is grammatically correct or not - thanks if anyone can provide definitive information on whether and how this sentence is grammatically correct or not correct. Specifically, 'pulling an endless appearance of weeds': "...afternoons occupied pulling an endless appearance of weeds that he could never seem to conquer (in later years this devolved to planning to pull weeds)." 65.59.235.138 (talk) 19:07, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see no grammatical issues. But as written he pulled an appearance of weeds. I assume that he actually pulled weeds. The difference is that in the first case there are no actual weeds. These could work instead:

"pulling an apparently endless amount of weeds"

"apparently endlessly pulling weeds"

-- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 20:01, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"pulling endlessly appearing weeds" or completely re-write it. MinorProphet (talk) 23:51, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not all appearances are the illusory intangible kind, only mainly apparitions. I think it makes sense as is. Sorry for your loss. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Seem to" may be somewhat superfluous, given the parenthetical, but also makes his plight seem less tragic. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:06, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I support the "pulling endlessly appearing weeds" wording. As a teenager, I worked as a dishwasher in three different restaurants, where my job was "washing endlessly appearing dirty dishes". Now, I am a Wikipedia administrator, where much of what I do is "blocking endlessly appearing self-promoters". Cullen328 (talk) 01:48, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See, I grew up on "the other side", pushing weed on a seemingly (but not actually) endless stream of frustrated menial workers. Might have something to do with my tolerance for somewhat wacky writing, from landscaper lingo to pipefitter prose. Now I work me the night shift, where I pull and pull and pull till it hurts (the word "however", that is). Anyway, I'm not tooting my own horn or anything. Your way works just fine! InedibleHulk (talk) 05:15, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, thanks for your comment, I think the phrase you endorse will win out and end the conflict, and I appreciate what you do to block endlessly appearing self-promoters. Indeed. Cheers . 65.59.235.138 (talk) 23:14, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an uncommon phrase if it weren't for the use of "appearance." Searching texts, I find it commonly stated as "an endless scourge of weeds." 97.82.165.112 (talk) 19:42, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vast tracts of poetry would have to be rewritten if all texts had to conform to "the rules". The only possible quibble with "pulling an endless appearance of weeds" is that, as Random person no 362478479 said above, one does not pull an appearance, but pulls actual weeds. But so what! Where does it say that precise literality must always apply? It's fine for its purpose, imo. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:23, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but the style of writing appropriate to poetry is vastly broader and welcoming of innovative phrasing than the semi-formal style called for when writing most obituaries. Cullen328 (talk) 23:22, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What must actual weeds do before any observer even plans to pull them but appear? By appearing, they make an appearance. After someone pulls them, they no longer appear, thus their appearance (the appearance of weeds) is indeed pulled, along with their sneaking feeling, recurrent aroma and incessant rustling sound (for a while, anyway). InedibleHulk (talk) 23:23, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's all about the ambiguity of appearance, which carries distracting ideas about disguises and phantoms. I read it as a collective noun. I suggest substituting the word reappearance. (I reason that there are no idioms such as false reappearance, outward reappearance, leather-effect reappearance, etc., to cause any ambiguity.) Card Zero (talk) 10:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is correct that "appearance" is ambiguous. The way it is being used here is similar to stating something like "Joe made an appearance at the gala last night." That means that Joe physically arrived and was seen. But, it goes further. It implies that he didn't want to be there and he left as quickly as possible. I doubt that weeds make an appearance in a garden just to be seen and then try to find a way to make a quick exit. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 15:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unless Joe is a disembodied ghost, who made a spiritual appearance, wanting very much to be seen. --Lambiam 21:31, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weeds are crafty. The Biblical "tares" look just like wheat, so if the farmer tried to uproot them he would destroy his crop. He has to wait till harvest, when the tops of the tares turn black and the tops of the wheat ears turn another colour. Then it's easy. 2A02:C7B:117:5200:9921:6A9E:88E6:D35 (talk) 16:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Make" is shifty. Weeds don't do what Jetset Joe does. But they do bring sight into being through their formation/alteration of material (classic 1A). InedibleHulk (talk) 21:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 6

Yoshitsune (TV series)

This drama TV is based on Tomiko Miyao's novel. Please, can you help me to find if there is a site where you can read the full book, in English or also in Japanese? Or in alternative a site with plot, charactere, etc.? Thank you.

Yoshitsune is not listed among her novels in her article, though web searching reveals that it was published in 2004, probably in Japanese only.

It is not available at the Open Library, but I am handicapped from further searching by having no Japanese whatever. I suggest you search further yourself (though I would have thought that any free online text of a 2004 book would be an illegal breach of copyright) or track down a copy for sale at one of the usual 2nd-hand sites such as Ebay and AbeBooks. Of course, Japan-based dealers would be most likely to have copies. Best of luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 16:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here's Tomiko Miyao's ja wikipedia page, which lists the book thus:

『義経』日本放送出版協会 2004 のち新潮文庫

Which with machine translation I can discern to be:

"Yoshitsune" NHK Publishing 2004 [something] library

Maybe that helps? The [something] is のち followed by 新潮, so I get the idea this says Future Fashion Library or maybe Future New Wave Library. Oh, and this looks like a page about the book on the NHK site. Card Zero (talk) 19:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page says the book is out of stock ("品切れ"). --Lambiam 21:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, 糞! Card Zero (talk) 07:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Japanese Wikipedia the TV series is based on two historical novels written by Tomiko Miyao and published in 2001–2004, 宮尾本平家物語 and 義経. Google translate romanizes the first as Miyao hon hirayamonogatari and the second as Yoshitsune. --Lambiam 21:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This, this and this Amazon page seems to be for different installments of the first novel, whille this may be for the full novel. --Lambiam 21:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See also the real Minamoto no Yoshitsune and his trusty side-kick Benkei, about whom there are more legends than facts. Alansplodge (talk) 13:22, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Queen Camilla Bloggs

Hypothetical question, but there are rules for these things:

If King Charles were to die, and the widowed Queen Camilla were to meet a commoner, a plumber named Joe Bloggs, fall in love with him and marry him, what would her formal title become, assuming she takes his surname?

My best guess would be: Dowager Queen Camilla, Mrs Joe Bloggs, but that may be way off. I'm not sure whether "Queen Mother" would feature anywhere, as she is not the mother of the next monarch, William V, or even his adoptive mother, but his step-mother. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Queen Step-Mother" has a certain ring. :) --Lambiam 21:10, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to traditional rules, a woman who re-marries should give up honorifics which were derived from her marriage to a previous husband, but it seems some have resisted... [18] AnonMoos (talk) 04:05, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have any widowed consorts remarried? DuncanHill (talk) 11:25, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deja vu

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Catherine Parr married Thomas Seymour, 1st Baron Seymour of Sudeley, in 1547. 2A02:C7B:117:5200:9D75:B5AB:7A7:39BD (talk) 11:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Diana remained Princess of Wales after her divorce. The mnemonic for Henry VIII goes "divorced, beheaded, died, divorced, beheaded, survived", so there's scope for investigating what happens after a dissolution. 2A02:C7B:117:5200:9D75:B5AB:7A7:39BD (talk) 12:44, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neither Catherine of Aragon nor Anne of Cleves (the two divorcees of Henry VIII) ever remarried, though as noted above, his last wife, who outlived him, did. --Jayron 32 13:16, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, to expand on DuncanHill's question, just in case they were casting their nets wider than queens of the UK or England, Eleanor of Aquitaine divorced one king (Louis VII of France to marry another Henry II of England, so, of course, she was queen even during her second marriage. Instructive is the Empress Matilda, who got her title as the consort of Henry V, Holy Roman Emperor, and after he died, she married Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count of Anjou, and also served as the disputed Queen Regnant of England for parts of The Anarchy. I'm not entirely sure of how she was known in her own time, but pretty much universally, in more modern historiography, she's simply known as "Empress Matilda", regardless of which phase of her life one is discussing her. She seems to have, in the minds of historians, retained the title even after her husband's death, even though she was later a Countess Consort and a Queen Regnant. --Jayron 32 17:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More widowed consorts that married down: Anne of Kiev was the consort of Henry I of France, and her second marriage was to Count Ralph IV of Valois. Adelaide of Maurienne was wife of Louis the Fat of France, and later seigneur Matthew I of Montmorency, Constable of France. Anne of Brittany may have the record for being queen consort multiple times, having been married, in succession to a Holy Roman Emperor and two Kings of France; she was also Duchess Regnant of an independent Brittany. Mary Tudor was married to Louis XII and later controversially married Charles Brandon, 1st Duke of Suffolk. Eleanor of Austria was married, in succession to a king of Portugal and a king of France. Mary, Queen of Scots was also Queen Consort of France as wife of Francis II of France, and later married both Lord Darnley and Earl Bothwell. Marie Louise was Napoleon Bonaparte's second wife, she later married two different counts. Emma of Normandy was married to both Ethelred the Unready and Cnut, a double queen consort. Adeliza of Louvain was married to Henry I of England, and later William d'Aubigny, 1st Earl of Arundel, controversially she had no children for Henry (which led to The Anarchy) and later had a whole bevy of them for the Earl of Arundel. Isabella of Angoulême was married to King John, and later to Hugh X of Lusignan, she had an impressive 14 children by both husbands. Isabella of Valois, second wife of the deposed Richard II of England, later married Charles, Duke of Orléans. Catherine of Valois was married to Henry V of England, and later to Owen Tudor. Marie de Coucy was the second wife of Alexander II of Scotland and later briefly to John II of Brienne. Yolande of Dreux was married to Alexander III of Scotland and later Arthur II, Duke of Brittany. And I'm tired of scanning the lists of queens consort, but it should be pretty obvious that it was not uncommon for queens consort to remarry. --Jayron 32 18:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another oddity from English history. Catherine of Valois married Henry V and became Queen Consort of England. On Henry's death she married Owen Tudor. Their son, Edmund Tudor was the father of Henry who usurped the throne at Bosworth Field (22 August 1485) to become King Henry VII. One of Henry's claims to the throne was as a result of his descent from the remarried widow of Henry V. Even for those days that was a bit shaky! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 18:33, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Succession Law in England was never really formally settled until the Act of Settlement 1701, previously there had been occasional acts that established short-term succession issues, like the various succession acts of Henry VIII's time (like the Third Succession Act), or based on the King's own proclamations, or based on assumptions as a result of inheritance traditions as pertains to other property, or by right of "whoever got there first", or whoever controlled the army, or whoever was in charge of the faction that killed the last king, etc. For the first 700+ years or so of English and British history, succession to the Monarchy was not well regulated at all.--Jayron 32 11:57, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the use of "Bloggs" in the title of this section reminds me of a minor incident in Elizabeth Gaskell's novel "Cranford", in which a certain Lady Glenmire (the widow of the late Earl of Glenmire) becomes known as Mrs. Hoggins after her marriage to a Mr. Hoggins. She appears to be happily married, but a certain snobbish element in the village of Cranford is aghast at her decision to place mere personal happiness above an aristocratic honorific ("She, who might have been called Lady Glenmire to her dying day!")... AnonMoos (talk) 13:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Joe Bloggs, analogous to John Doe in the USA. Alansplodge (talk) 10:24, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Proteus, can you help out here? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:54, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see no one has linked Courtesy titles in the United Kingdom yet. Essentially, women can be addressed by a title they hold themselves, or by a ‘courtesy title’ that gives them the same rank as their husband, or that is derived from their father. For example, Prince Edward’s daughter uses Lady Louise because her father is a duke.

The #Divorced_wives_and_widows_who_remarry section is the one we need, but it’s not too clear. If Charles was an ordinary peer, I think Camilla’s remarriage to Bloggs would in theory mean she loses the Queen and becomes the Mrs. But Camilla belongs to the Order of the Garter in her own right, so in this hypothetical case, her highest title would now be her own: Lady Camilla…Shand/Parker-Bowles-Mountbatten-Windsor-Bloggs (I have no idea what her surname is/would be). But as everyone has pointed out, queens sometimes have different rules, case by case…70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:46, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above, if she were an ordinary peeress, she would lose any title she gained through marriage and be known by whichever was the higher of any title held in her own right (here, as noted above, her right to be "Lady Camilla [Surname]" as both a Lady of the Garter and a Lady of the Thistle) or any title gained by subsequent remarriage. This was not always the case: peeresses used to keep their titles on remarriage. As the House of Lords held in the Cowley case: "everybody knows that it is a very common practice for peeresses (not being peeresses in their own right) after marrying commoners to retain the title lost by such marriage. It is not a matter of right. It is merely a matter of courtesy and allowed by the usages of society." But this is no longer the practice. The only relevant precedent, Catherine Parr, is therefore not entirely helpful because although she kept her title as Queen Catherine on remarriage, she did so in accordance with a custom which no longer exists. That said, my view (though it is just that) is that the position of a crowned Queen would be different to that of an ordinary peeress. I suspect that she would retain her title, and that (unlike a lesser princely title) it would not be considered appropriate for it to be combined with any lesser style - so I think she'd simply remain "Queen Camilla", rather than becoming "Queen Camilla, Mrs Joe Bloggs". Proteus (Talk) 17:17, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I guess we'll have to wait for Mr Bloggs to make his appearance in the annals of history for a definitive answer to this question. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:00, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Queen Stepmother

The above thread makes me think — if everything goes in accordance with "the rules", and the Queen survives the King, will the Queen be known as the Queen Mother, or (given the fact that she's not the King's mother) will she merely be considered a queen dowager? Aside from the aforementioned Catherine Parr, whose article isn't particularly enlighting on this subject, I can't find a single English or British queen dowager since 1066 whose late husband (1) was succeeded by his son, and (2) had fathered that son by a previous wife. Nyttend (talk) 01:47, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it. When King George VI died his widow was Queen Elizabeth, and his daughter was Queen Elizabeth II. Therefore the mother was known as the Queen Mother in the main to distinguish her from her daughter. Should King Charles die and leave Queen Camilla as a widow, she would not be mixed up with the putative Queen Catherine. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Upon King Charles’s death, Queen Camilla could be referred to as “the Dowager Queen” in situations where confusion might occur. Blueboar (talk) 12:03, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Part of the problem is that rules are developed over time from years of tradition; we've had dozens or hundreds of dukes, viscounts, marquises, etc. which has given history time to develop itself a set of conventions like "How the ex-wife of a deceased Earl will be referred to", because we've had hundreds of such situations. We've had far fewer Queens Consort in such situations, so conventions have not so developed; it's essentially a sui generis situation, so there are no "rules". --Jayron 32 12:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in the 20th century we had Alexandra of Denmark and Mary of Teck, who were known as "Queen Alexandra" and "Queen Mary" after their husbands' deaths, so there seems to be a perfectly good precedent. It was only having two Queen Elizabeths at once that muddied the waters somewhat. Alansplodge (talk) 22:51, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2022 September 14#Queen stepmother: the conclusion was that she would be called "Queen Camilla". Alansplodge (talk) 10:28, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 7

Cadburys

Was Henry J. Cadbury, the American Quaker, related to the British Quaker Cadbury family, and if so, how? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 01:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Cadburys were an English Quaker family until one ancestor, Joel Cadbury, came to Philadelphia in 1815 and married his first cousin Caroline Warder in 1822, thus establishing an American branch...Henry Cadbury's father, Joel Cadbury, Jr.. So Henry's grandfather would be Joel, ~~last~~ child of Richard Tapper Cadbury and uncle of George Cadbury? Bacon, Margaret Hope (1987). Let this life speak : the legacy of Henry Joel Cadbury. pp. 1–2. fiveby(zero) 03:47, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See trees 1 and 4 in Crosfield, John F. (1985). A history of the Cadbury family. fiveby(zero) 04:21, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Fiveby: Many thanks. I was trying to look up Henry Cadbury, the director of the Daily News and the News Chronicle and was surprised where I ended up. Btw, the John F. Crosfield who wrote the book is the John F. Crosfield about whom we have an article. DuncanHill (talk) 12:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 8

Birth and death dates

Resolved

– Thank you! Viriditas (talk) 22:34, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having trouble verifying birth and death dates for James Everett Lipp. They are currently sourced to Encyclopedia Astronautica; that link tells us the site hasn't been updated since 2019 and is out of date and no longer maintained. As you can see from that source, the birth and death date appear to be cited to space historian Roger D. Launius, NASA Chief Historian, NASA History Office. The link is currently dead. One would think there would be at least one obituary from 1993 (the death date) available. The assumption is that the subject spent most of his life in Pasadena and Santa Monica, California. One very old source dating from the beginning of his career says he was living there and had a wife and child. Considering his importance in military history, there should be something more about his life and death. There's a lot of sources about his career and work at RAND, but not much else. Can anyone else confirm and verify his birth and death dates? Viriditas (talk) 06:46, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing I could find is his entry on ancestry.com. I guess his being more a behind the scenes figure makes sources about him personally scarce and the pre (mainstream) internet death means that what sources exist are probably not online. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 12:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't give the birth and death dates, but there's a Caltech commencement program from 1932 showing that James Everett Lipp earned a Bachelor of Science in Engineering. William Shockley was one of his classmates. --Amble (talk) 17:24, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a record for his PhD thesis in 1935 showing Theodore von Kármán as his PhD advisor. That may be a notable biographical detail in its own right. --Amble (talk) 17:29, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some additional biographical details in the Caltech Engineering and Science magazine from October 1952. Has him living in Santa Monica. --Amble (talk) 18:03, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some historical interviews and notes refer to him as Jimmy Lipp: [19], [20] --Amble (talk) 18:09, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This NASA biographical list also has him born in 1910. --Amble (talk) 18:17, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Findagrave entries exist for who the parents supposedly are:[21] and [22]. The obit for Paul lists spouse Edith. That was his second wife, after he and Jamie divorced prior to 1930. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:04, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ancestry's California Death Index gives James Everett Lipp info: born July 3, 1910, in Washington, DC; died Aug 13, 1993, in San Diego; mother's maiden name Wood. The lack of an obit is not surprising, as that's often the case in large cities. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:27, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant now, U.S. Congress, House Comitee on Science and Astronautics Hearings 1960 has the date of July 3 1910 Hearings. --Askedonty (talk) 21:11, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article currently lacks places of birth and death (DC and San Diego). The lack of a Findagrave entry, as with the lack of an obit, is probably also a consequence of dying in a large city. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Something else occurred to me. Lipp died in San Diego in 1993. That's around the time major media consolidation was gearing up for job cuts. Mosaic was released in January, but I didn't use it myself until the end of April when 1.0 was released; at that point, most people who had downloaded it (a tiny minority of academics, scientists, and hobbyists) saw what was coming for the print media. I suspect that when Lipp died several months later in August, San Diego was already cutting back on obituary writers, as were other newspapers. Viriditas (talk) 23:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I was wrong. The job cuts occurred a year earlier, in February 1992. 144 editorial staffers at the San Diego Tribune and San Diego Union lost their jobs. "The scrappy Tribune succumbed to the same diseases that have claimed at least 35 other newspapers over the last two years: the powerful influence of television and changing readership habits that have frustrated publishers’ efforts to attract and retain readers without the time to devote to an evening publication." Viriditas (talk) 23:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Big-city papers typically only carry obits of "well-known" people, and this guy might not have been well-known enough to make the cut. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:28, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 9

Wee Macgreegor

I have concocted a brief article on the Scottish character Wee Macgreegor, prompted by the discovery of a slim volume in my late parents' library. What I need is a reference connecting it with Wee MacGregor railway in Australia, or the Wee MacGregor Mine which it originally served, if such a connection exists. Alansplodge (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't found one yet, but from a quick look on Trove the character was regularly mentioned in Queensland newspapers from 1903 onwards. DuncanHill (talk) 11:56, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copper at the 'curry, The 1917 Copper Boom Railways of Cloncurry and Their Aftermath might have more info? Not available digitally that I can see. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:25, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hodge, David (November 1927). ""Wee Macgreegor" Twenty-Five. An appreciation of J. J. Bell". The Bookman. London. no help for question, but don't see cited in article. The Critical Kailyard, etc. Tablets, rocks, jugs, pencils, jujubes, matches, bonnets, lozenges, mufflers, dolls, sardines, whiskey, stage play, and march, but not yet mines or railways. Here[23] at least is double-e for the name of the mine. fiveby(zero) 19:09, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. Curiously, my father's name was David Hodge, but he wasn't writing articles aged 9. Alansplodge (talk) 21:43, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help identify an artist

I have a bronze plaque of David Lloyd George, dated 1919. It is approximately 150mm wide and 160mm high. The artist's name appears to be "E. Viand" - I may be mistaken about the V. You can see a picture of the plaque at Imgur. I have been unable to identify the artist, and would appreciate your help. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 12:19, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could be Viard. Card Zero (talk) 14:56, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe you are right! From that I find he also did Haig and Clemenceau. Unfortunately there is a modern sculptor called Etienne Viard who is confusing google. DuncanHill (talk) 15:18, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I tried several likely French boys' names starting with "E" but no luck. Alansplodge (talk) 22:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the common style and theme combined with the identical year, I would guess that all three plaques are part of a series commemoration WWI leaders. Given that the Haig and Clemenceau plaques were sold together for £32 it is likely that the artist is not well known. The fact that the auction house doesn't identify the artist and just states "signed 'E.Viard 1919'" suggests that they couldn't identify the artist either. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 22:59, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He sees communists in his soup

Where does that line come from? Describing some kind of witch hunt guy. Maybe from a movie or suchlike. Web search didn't immediately help. I'm reminded of it due to the Oppenheimer movie. Thanks. 2601:644:8584:2010:0:0:0:5FA4 (talk) 20:54, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The earliest (and just about the only) example that Google can find for me is:

"Charlie sees communists in his soup . He and his bunch would be funny if they weren't so pathetic."

The Confetti Man (1975) p. 282 by Bonnie Jones Reynolds.

Alansplodge (talk) 21:40, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That sounds like the right type of quote, though I'm fairly sure I've never read that book. I don't see anything online about a movie adaptation but maybe someone else used the line in about the same way. 2601:644:8584:2010:0:0:0:5FA4 (talk) 21:44, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"The government's got us seeing Communists in our soup." Charles Stanforth in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull DuncanHill (talk) 21:50, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that explains all the unintelligable results about Lego Indiana Jones 2: The Adventure Continues (apparently a computer game). Alansplodge (talk) 22:16, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A few more examples: "You even see Communists in the soup!", "They even see Communists in the soup they eat.", "Glenn Beck is the sort of person who sees Communists in his soup, ...". --Lambiam 22:35, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And probably a reference to "Animal Crackers in My Soup". Alansplodge (talk) 22:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Probably entirely unrelated to that song in any way. The meaning of the phrase is that someone is so irrationally afraid of communists, that they could be hiding anywhere, even somewhere as ridiculous as a bowl of soup. Like, obviously a whole-ass human can't hide inside a bowl of soup, but the person in question is so scared of communists they look for them even in such places. --Jayron 32 13:15, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Or perhaps it's Alphabet soup, and the communists are hiding secret messages in it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 13:23, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 10

Countess Seckendorff

In the context of the black market in World War II Paris, specifically 93 rue Lauriston (Henri Lafont and Pierre Bonny) I am trying to expand and reference the following statement from fr.wikipedia: "Countess Seckendorff, an authentic German aristocrat who spied on Parisian high society'.

A simple Google search is giving me a lot of hits about a different countess. I suspect a nomenclature problem such as I found with Illa Meery.

Article is Countesses of the Gestapo. Thank for any brain power applied to this problem.Elinruby (talk) 02:28, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reference for that statement appears to be from Cyril Eder (2006). Les Comtesses de la Gestapo. Paris: Grasset. A description of the book is found at this site, where the countess in question is described as la comtesse Seckendorff, laquelle, autrichienne, agent double connu sous le nom de Mercedes, réussira mystérieusement à échapper à la justice française et finira dans la peau d'une pairesse d'Ecosse. Better biographical information should be found within its pages. 59.102.46.248 (talk) 12:49, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 270: / Line 270: @@
 :::::And probably a reference to "[[Animal Crackers in My Soup]]". [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 22:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
 ::::::Probably entirely unrelated to that song in any way.  The meaning of the phrase is that someone is ''so irrationally afraid'' of communists, that they could be hiding ''anywhere'', even somewhere as ridiculous as a bowl of soup.  Like, obviously a whole-ass human can't hide inside a bowl of soup, but the person in question is so scared of communists they look for them even in such places.  --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 13:15, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
+:::::::Or perhaps it's [[Alphabet soup (soup)|Alphabet soup]], and the communists are hiding secret messages in it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/51.198.140.169|51.198.140.169]] ([[User talk:51.198.140.169|talk]]) 13:23, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 = August 10 =