Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:03, 17 June 2021

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.

June 9

Looking for a name of a specific cloth some Muslims put on their head

After long research without results, I decided to come here to try... I'm looking for the name of this specific cloth that some of the Muslims put on the head. (example 1, example 2). I searched for "head cloth of Muslims", "Keffiyeh", etc. and found nothing. Maybe you know its name? Thank you ThePupil (talk) 23:07, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should specify whether it's worn by men or worn by women... AnonMoos (talk) 03:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would say the guys in those photos are men. Wikipedia has a list of Muslim headgear. One of those photographed is a kufi.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but None of these names refer to the piece of cloth specifically wore by these men.ThePupil (talk) 09:47, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The term seems to be Imamah, which denotes a headscarf worn by a cleric and covers a number of styles. Your examples seem to be typical of Arab Muslims. Alansplodge (talk) 10:23, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Arabic term إمامة (ʾimāma) basically means "imam-ship" (or, more literally, "leadership", since Arabic "imam" is a generic term for "leader"). The page shows headwear that may be deemed suitable for an imam. I would classify the headwear itself as a traditional Arabian keffiyeh, draped rather more loosely than is usual for practical use. In Saudi Arabia, it is often secured with a headband. The guy in the second picture linked to in the question is Sheik Assim Al-hakeem, controversial for his extremely conservative views, who can be seen here wearing a keffiyeh in the classic red-and-white pattern. The piece of cloth does not have an inherent religious significance; it is the marriage of a local custom that is originally utilitarian with the religious requirement of modesty, cemented by tradition. --Lambiam 12:24, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link for keffiyeh LongHairedFop (talk) 10:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 10

Largest country in history?

The Soviet Union was the largest country in terms of area for the almost seven decades it existed. But what was the largest country in terms of area in history? Was it also the Soviet Union or some other country? JIP | Talk 00:53, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See List of largest empires; according to the article the Soviet Union was the largest for 25 years. Zoozaz1 talk 01:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not surprised that the British Empire is at the top of the list; it had Canada, Australia, the Indian subcontinent, and a few other things.... AnonMoos (talk) 03:22, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lo, all our pomp of yesterday / Is one with Nineveh and Tyre! (Recessional). Alansplodge (talk) 10:29, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Soviet Union would have a) been the largest Empire by the time the of the Balfour Declaration of 1926 when it was established that all Dominions of the British Empire were essentially sovereign states on their own, which was formalized into law by the Statute of Westminster 1931, this functionally made the three largest chunks of the British Empire (Canada, Australia, and South Africa) independent, and by the same time period the Soviet Union was fully incorporated as a thing, so from at least 1926/1931 the Soviet Union was the largest sovereign state in the world. There is ALSO nothing special about 1975; the Soviet Union remained the largest country in the world until it officially broke up in 1991 with the Belovezha Accords. I have NO IDEA why that list says that the Soviet Union only existed from 1950-1975, or whatever it is saying, but that is bafflingly not true... Since the breakup of the Soviet Union, Russia has been the largest country in the world. The largest empire in history was the British Empire by 1920, only a few years before it started to break up. --Jayron 32 16:19, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's a little simplistic. The Statute of Westminster did not magically convert Australia, Canada and New Zealand into fully independent states. In Australia's case, there's a strong argument that says we did not achieve total legal independence until the passage of the Australia Act 1986. Also, you had an a), but no b) or c). -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:26, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing you said I would have disagreed with, nor did I say anything that would have led one to believe I thought anything else but what you said. --Jayron 32 13:58, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's the difference between true and referenced. The year 1975 ist referenced (with a reference named Taagepera, Rein (1978)) and perfectly adequate, for the 1978 paper (I didn't check it) is eventually based upon 1975 data. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 12:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Referenced doesn't mean "referenced to something which is true and/or useful". We shouldn't be providing references to things which are known to be wrong. verifiability means that something is "able to be shown to be true". (veri- truth, -fy to cause, make, or show, -able, the ability to do something, -ity the condition of being; thus verifiability is "the condition of being able to show something is true") Truth is not a sufficient condition, but it is a necessary condition for something to be verifiable. Things which are demonstrably wrong don't become true merely because someone else wrote down a wrong thing. --Jayron 32 13:58, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the column in question is "Approximate period", with all years ending in multiples of 25. If we offered a more precise date for the USSR, it would be out of place, and presumably the source's author figured it was more reasonable to give the approximate end date as 1975 rather than 2000. Nyttend backup (talk) 14:31, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I recently found a paper that claims the Mongol Empire may have reached all the way to the Arctic Ocean, which if true would have made it the largest empire ever. https://www.academia.edu/37799970/The_Mongol_Empire_s_Northern_Border_Re_evaluating_the_Surface_Area_of_the_Mongol_Empire Iapetus (talk) 18:35, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Isabel Thomas

Hello, Wikipedians. If possible, I'd like to have some WP:GNG-good refs for Isabel Thomas (and that's "just" a WP:INTERVIEW, not optimal), author of more than 100 science books for children. Her books have been written about in WSJ and NYT (that's T, not P). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:23, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another interview: [1]. Snippets of personal info can be gleaned from [2], [3], [4], good enough for independent sourcing. --Lambiam 20:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for trying! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can add a couple more, but still not as in-depth as you’d like. She talks a bit about her life at the end of this interview also: [5]. There’s a screenshot of local newspaper article at [6]. And you can source her shortlisting for book prizes to [7], [8]. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 14:57, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The The Herts Advertiser was the best so far. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:37, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Her book Fox: A Circle of Life Story probably meets GNG though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:44, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 11

Stephen VI and liturgical languages

Every now and than in Glagolitic script someone "corrects" bull to bill in the sentence "In 885, Pope Stephen VI issued a bill to restrict spreading and reading Christian services in languages other than Latin or Greek". Guess this can be prevented with a wikilink to papal bull. Anyway, when I was checking this I found this ref from Great Moravia, page 81 and note at page 344. It mentions the letter Quia te zelo (not a bull and somewhat contested). It seems also the article is linking to the wrong Pope Stephen VI, the right one being now called Stephen V. I was hoping someone more history savy could double check my findings or suggest a better source for papal documents (guess legal matters were a bit complicated in that period). Personuser (talk) 07:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is an issue with the numbering of the popes named Stephen. The article Pope-elect Stephen explains the situation. Thus, depending on the age of sources you use, Pope Stephen V can be called Stephen VI. Xuxl (talk) 12:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So if the document was not a bull, shouldn't we replace "issued a bull to restrict spreading and reading" by "wrote a letter (Quia te zelo) to Svatopluk I prohibiting holding"? --Lambiam 10:16, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is my understanding. To be clear, this letters had a legal status and according to papal bull the name bull was introduced later and its use may be fuzzy for this period. I also don't know if similar documents were issued in the same year, but if this was the only one, it seems possible that it wasn't binding for the whole Christianity, which the current worlding somewhat suggests, hence the hope in some historian's opinion. The situation was probably quite confusing already in the IX century. Personuser (talk) 11:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to de:Gloria in excelsis Deo (Hadrian II.), de:Industriae tuae and de:Quia te zelo fidei these papal letters dealt with the mission and liturgy in Moravia. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 22:14, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help in identifying a mysterious book

In 2009, French editor Éditions Payot published a book by an American author named Linnet Burden, under the title Les ombres de Chicago ("Chicago Shadows"), described as a murder mystery. It was reprinted in 2010 in a paperback edition in the prestigious Le Livre de Poche collection, so this would normally be a fairly well-documented book. The catalogue information at the Bibliothèque nationale de France site [9] states it is the translation of a novel named Cheap. Various sites say that the author's name is a pseudonym for Chicago Tribune reporter Linnet Myers (Burden), who does have a significant on-line presence. However, there is no trace of the original novel anywhere, or indeed any sign that Myers/Burden has ever published a novel. So can anyone identify the original novel from which the translation is derived, and its date of publication. It would normally have come out in the five-year period before the initial printing of its French translation. Xuxl (talk) 15:46, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that the (presumed) English original was never published. This is unusual but can sometimes happen when the intended publisher changes their mind or some other factor intervenes*, but the translated edition, already commissioned, nevertheless goes ahead. It's also possible that the author, though presumably a primary Anglophone, actually wrote the work in (for example) French to begin with. Again unusual, but not unknown.

(* Possible reasons include: the desire not to unbalance the publisher's monthly releases; the prior appearance of another book overly similar to the one in preparation; a real-world event that makes the book's subject unexpectedly sensitive; a legal objection by someone apparently or actually portrayed in the book (this delayed the appearance of Richard Adams' novel The Girl in a Swing, to my personal knowledge – the entire first printing was recalled from bookshops a week or two before publication); the retirement or death of the particular editor handling the book, with no other editor wanting to take it on; the sale of the publisher or imprint to another company that declines to publish that book or author.)

The English edition might also have been delayed due to similar factors, and subsequently published under a different title and or different pseudonym than that already printed in the French edition. Title changes prior to publication are by no means uncommon (ordinarily they don't come to our attention) and a change of pseudonym is also not unusual.

{The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.0.58 (talk) 16:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Xuxl: according to Linnet Burden's LinkedIn page "Current fiction and free-lance non-fiction writer. Former reporter, foreign correspondent and magazine writer for the Chicago Tribune. Author, "Les Ombres de Chicago," published in 2009 by Payot & Rivages in Paris, France". DuncanHill (talk) 16:22, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this, to both of you. I saw she had a LinkedIn page but could not access it. So it does seem the work was never published in English, but only in a French translation. It's rather unusual for this type of book (it happened all the time for books by Eastern European dissidents before the fall of the Berlin Wall) but it's not entirely unprecedented either. Xuxl (talk) 17:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps someone who can access her LinkedIn page (I too cannot) would like to contact her and ask how this situation arose? It doesn't seem to me to be an intrusive or unusual question for a published writer. {The poster formely known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.0.58 (talk) 21:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the answer a bit too obvious to pose the question? Clearly, the American publishing houses she sent the manuscript to declined to publish it. The polite rejection letters will not have revealed a solid reason behind these decisions, but it is possible that the French market has more taste for this type of policier. --Lambiam 10:03, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care enough about the answer to bother the author directly; I just wanted to verify, for a database I'm keeping, that the English original has never been published, which appears to be the case. That said, I don't think the reason is as obvious as Lambian thinks. We're talking about two big publishing houses in France, and they normally only request translations for books that have been successful in their original language, so it's very rare for a book by an unknown author to come out in a French translation first. They do undertake translations of unpublished manuscripts for cult writers who are more popular in French than in their original language (see Derek Raymond), but that would not be the case for an unpublished writer like Linnet Burden. So there is likely an unusual story about how Payot got the book out in the first place, as it's not one whose natural audience would be in France, even though the French public does love reading American and British detective novels. Xuxl (talk) 12:34, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A further thought, Xuxl. Do you have (or can you get) access to an actual copy (or scan) of the book? In my experience, translated French publications usually both credit the translator and state in the indicia <<Traduit par l'Americain>> (or <<–l'Anglais>> for a British author – and yes, they do make that distinction). In this case, I would expect Le Livre de Poche to have made the circumstances clear. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.0.58 (talk) 17:05, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The link from the Bibliothèque nationale de France, in my original question, includes this information (translated from English (United States) by Lorraine Darrow; original title Cheap. It was when I looked up that title that I came up empty, as, as now seems clear, it was never published in English. Xuxl (talk) 17:44, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This site (a blog, so not a reliable source) also reckons that the English original was never published. --Viennese Waltz 17:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 12

Retired State Politician

Hi, I knew David Bobzien (Jr.) very well growing up and know a little bit about his work in Nevada, but his Wikipedia article isn't very accurate. Also a lot of the links at the bottom of the page go to broken or outdated pages. I've heard from a few people that the Wikipedia page was mainly started because he was thinking about trying to be a Congressman, but his campaign never got off the ground. He is pretty much out of politics now. I don't know enough about wikipedia to try and delete an article or if this even should be deleted but I don't it should be on this site the way it looks now. -KTcup82 (talk) 07:23, 12 June 2021 (UTC).[reply]

There is a (slightly complicated) procedure for nominating an article for deletion, described in detail in the section Wikipedia:Articles for deletion § Nominating article(s) for deletion. The rationale for deletion in this case would be the lack of notability; for the criteria, see Wikipedia:Notability (people) § Politicians and judges. If you feel the subject of the article does not meet these criteria, it is a waste of time to improve the article. You can, alternatively, simply mark the article by inserting {{notability|notability (people)}} at the beginning of the wikitext. --Lambiam 09:34, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since he was a member of the Nevada Assembly for eight years, he almost certainly meets notability guidelines, so there is no point of asking for deletion. It's a question of improving the article based on reliable sources. The article contains very little information as it is, and it does not contain any speculation about future political ambitions either, so I'm not sure what would need to be removed. Xuxl (talk) 12:39, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to study WP:Template index/Cleanup and add an appropriate tag or tags at the top of the article, thus asking for attention to the problems, and you could explain your relevant personal knowledge on the article's talk page. --184.144.99.25 (talk) 04:21, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Access to La Prensa (Managua)

Access question. What's the best way to find out (perhaps: ask here!) if any of the Wikipedia Library resources have access to foreign-language press like La Prensa (Managua)? I have been working on improve en-wiki coverage of Nicaragua (of particular interest as there is a presidential election this year) and La Prensa is the country's largest paper but the paywall is a beast. Any chance I might access through one of the databases? I struck out looking in EBSCO altho it's possible I'm not searching for the title of a publication correctly. Thank you much! Innisfree987 (talk) 20:30, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Standard place is WP:REX... AnonMoos (talk) 22:16, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AnonMoos, thanks so much—success there (via ProQuest). Appreciate it! Innisfree987 (talk) 04:16, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 13

Strange word in “Jo’s Boys” by Louisa May Alcott

In Chapter Ten (“Demi Settles”) of the novel “Jo’s Boys” by Louisa May Alcott, the character Josie says of a paper that she “found it in the big ‘Dic’”. What does “Dic” mean in this context? I’ve tried to find out by searching online, but I have not been successful. Here is a link to the text on Project Gutenberg:

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/3499

Assuming it's a correct transcription, "dictionary" is the most obvious. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:01, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"You monkey, how dare you meddle with my papers?" cried the irate poet, making futile grabs at the saucy girl, who skipped to and fro, waving a bit of paper tantalizingly before him.
"Didn't; found it in the big 'Dic'. Serves you right if you leave your rubbish about. Don't you like my song? It's very pretty."
“I'll teach you one that you won't like if you don't give me my property.”
“Come and get it if you can”; and Josie vanished... [10]

Yes, "dictionary" seems to be it. Alansplodge (talk) 22:24, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, dic means dictionary, and it's in the OED. Earliest citation (as Dick) 1832, latest 2010. DuncanHill (talk) 20:57, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why the state need to continue doing monetary inflation (to cause price inflation) after the first few months/years doing it? Shouldnt people spending their money to avoid the price inflation cause price inflation by itself?

I have a question about state monetary inflation/price inflation:

The state say doing monetary inflation (enought to cause price inflation) is good because, because with price inflation, people will spend money to not lose their money because of price inflation that will happen at the future, and so people doing that (spending and investing their money) will help the economy.

The thing is, spending money cause price inflation.

So, the state do enough monetary inflation and cause price inflation, and at the next month, do the same and at the next month do the same and this goes on and on.....

Assuming their monetary/price inflation thing would would make people spend money (and spending money cause price inflation), why the state need to continue to do monetary inflation to be able to cause the price inflation, after the first few months, shouldnt the act of people spending their money because of the price inflation caused by the state make sure the price inflation thing continue to happen and so there is no need to the state print money money?2804:7F2:59B:D224:19F2:BD6B:366A:B714 (talk) 23:57, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you've read monetary inflation, and agree that counteracting deflation is a highly desirable goal in and of itself, have a look at stimulus (economics). When demand is insufficient to ensure full employment, a responsible monetary authority -- which in the major economies is generally not the same as the state, will try other means to reduce unemployment. DOR (HK) (talk) 00:15, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you looked at Keynesian economics and related articles? In any case, in the 2010s, the U.S. Federal Reserve had difficulty in reaching a certain desired inflation target (see Inflation targeting). Since the 1990s, Japan has often had low, zero, and in some cases even negative interest rates, and has still struggled with deflation... AnonMoos (talk) 06:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, spending money cause price inflation. Are you sure abut that? Iapetus (talk) 09:20, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's one cause: Demand-pull inflation is the most common cause of rising prices. It occurs when consumer demand for goods and services increases so much that it outstrips supply. Producers can't make enough to meet demand. They may not have time to build the manufacturing needed to boost supply. They may not have enough skilled workers to make it. Or the raw materials might be scarce. If sellers don't raise the price, they will sell out. They soon realize they now have the luxury of hiking up prices. If enough do this, they create inflation. [11] Alansplodge (talk) 11:00, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It should be worth noting that supply problems are the current price drivers in the USA. DOR (HK) (talk) 19:48, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Together with "pent-up demand". People haven't been spending much during lockdowns, but will probably go on a spending spree once the brakes are off. See Pent-up demand, shortages fuel U.S. inflation. Giving a big fat cheque to everyone will probably speed things along too, see Will Biden's COVID relief plan cause inflation?. Alansplodge (talk) 22:20, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spending died last year, and has only barely returned to trend. This is a supply problem, folks. (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCEC96) DOR (HK) (talk) 13:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The scenario you describe would make sense if the economy were a steady state, but most countries also make every effort to grow their economies long-term. If the central bank stops inflating the money supply at all, but the economy continues to grow, this economic growth will eventually surpass any lingering inflation, and you go back into deflation: every unit of currency becomes worth more because there's more "stuff" backing it. --47.155.96.47 (talk) 02:41, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 14

Silver Doors of the Taj Mahal

Hey, I do so hope I'm doing this correctly. I've just recently come across the idea that, upon his capture of Agra in 1761, Surajmal stole and/or melted down the silver doors of the Taj Mahal. Said story can be found all over the web, though sadly, as far as I could see, always without citing even a single source. Wikipedia, as far as I'm aware, does not mention anything of the like in its english article on the Taj Mahal, though the spanish article includes the sentence "However, other elements were lost over the centuries, among them the silver gates of the access fort" (as translated by google), notably without any reference to Surajmal and, frustratingly, without citing any source. My question, then, is of course what did happen to the doors (if there ever were any), and perhaps where the story about Surajmal looting them (if it is untrue) originated. Many thanks --AFlyingTurtleMan (talk) 11:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This seems reasonably reliable (UCLA) and gives two generic sources that I couldn't check (Tadgell is on gbooks, but searching didn't help). Personuser (talk) 12:30, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated! --AFlyingTurtleMan (talk) 12:42, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is mentioned – without citing a source – in the recently created article Capture of Agra Fort. --Lambiam 16:44, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an 1892 book source. --Lambiam 17:04, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also A Handbook to Agra and the Taj, 1904 “The Taj also possessed formerly two wonderful silver doors…These silver doors were looted and melted down by the Jâts in 1764.” And The Taj Mahal, 2003 “Gates of solid silver guarded the entrance.” 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:16, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article on the capture of Agra Fort is indeed one of the occasions I've seen it online in uncited form. Thank you all a lot! That's a bunch of decent sources.

Sankey Commission reports

Could anyone point me to an online text of the Second Stage reports of the Sankey Commission please? DuncanHill (talk) 22:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is this it? [12] 70.67.193.176 (talk) 13:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is it it, it's also more than I asked for and in a good way! Many thanks, DuncanHill (talk) 15:08, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merkit masks in Mongol

In Mongol (film) there are some scenes like this in which the evil Merkits wear full-face fur masks in their attacks. Even Temujin wears one when infiltrating the Merkit camp. Is there a historical basis for these masks? What was their purpose beyond looking interesting in film? The mask in Mongolian armour is quite different. --Error (talk) 23:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I only found a Mongolian or Tibetan iron war mask (12th–14th century) which is "one of only two known masks of this type". These Mongol warriors seem to prefer the barefaced look. Alansplodge (talk) 10:22, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The mask is the same one that is in Mongolian armour. I have added text about its rarity with your link as reference. As the Met says and you can see in Commons, Mongols use masks for rituals but I see nothing about fur masks. I guessed it could have been added by the film team inspired by another people. Or maybe it is a cold protection device. --Error (talk) 10:39, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merkits wore Merkins? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:11, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 15

What did the FO have on Williamson?

In GIlbert, Martin (1975). "43: The Genoa Conference". The Stricken World 1916-1922. Winston S. Churchill. Vol. IV. London: William Heinemann Ltd. p. 787. ISBN 0434130109. we read the words of Winston Churchill in a letter to Clemmie "The Williamson episode now appears vy murky behind the scenes. I shd have thought his peerage quite justified: but it now appears that the Foreign Office dossier is rather disagreeable. This is a secret". The ODNB says "Williamson was caught up in the scandals surrounding Lloyd George's abuse of the honours system. At the same time he attracted criticism because it was widely thought that his firm had traded with the enemy during the First World War" but it's not clear that this is what was in the FO dossier. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 01:14, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[13] says, among other things, that Williamson's peerage was one of the ones that blew the lid off the Lloyd George scandal, to wit "Also proposed for a peerage was Sir Archibald Williamson, an oil tycoon who was accused of having traded with the enemy during the war, via South America. The body responsible for managing the wartime blockade of Germany, the Foreign Trade Department of the Foreign Office, compiled a large file on Williamson's activities, which had led to his licences to trade being withdrawn for a period during the war. 'The firm's record was putrid,' concluded a report to the Foreign Secretary, Lord Curzon. Intercepted letters from the firm contained instructions on how to trade with the enemy while staying within the strict letter of the law. Nonetheless, in 1922, Williamson was elevated to the peerage as the 1st Baron Forres. Although he defended himself vigorously against all the charges against him, it is likely that Williamson chose a territorial title in order to expunge his surname from public memory." Basically, he used his firm and his connections to the Lloyd George government to help Germans violate the blockade. The dossier had evidence of his actions in the form of intercepted letters that implicated him. --Jayron 32 16:57, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Jayron32:. Of course the Tories' main objections to Lloyd George's sale of honours were that 1) Too many Jews, Scots, and businessmen were buying them, 2) Too few people who'd been to the right schools (either of them) or the right universities (either of them) were getting honours, and 3), and most importantly, they were only getting 50% of the take. DuncanHill (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The only good thing about a politician is if, once they are bought, they stay bought. --Jayron 32 17:27, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand this legal maneuver

I just read this: [14]. Can someone explain briefly what this means, without getting too "legalistic"? The Supreme Court is deciding whether or not to take a case that it was presented with. What exactly is it asking of the Justice Department? And what does the Justice Department have to do with anything, anyway? I am totally confused. Thanks! 32.209.55.38 (talk) 03:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, why can't the Supreme Court just make a decision on its own? ... (which it presumably does ALL of the time) ... Why would they think that they need "outside help" to make what is a "routine decision"? Thanks. 32.209.55.38 (talk) 03:46, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is the Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College case. First, take anything from the Daily Mail as a grain of salt, as consensus on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources has determined that it is unreliable (personally, I find several of the Daily Mail's articles poorly written). More to the point: the Justice Dept. is involved because last year under Trump's direction when the case was being heard in the Federal Appeals Court, they filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the students suing Harvard, seeking to end those affirmative action practices in its student admissions.[15] Now that the Justice Dept. is under Biden, and Democrats generally are more supportive of affirmative action, it is more likely to do a 180 degree turn and support Harvard's side instead. I guess the Supreme Court is giving the Biden administration this courtesy to offer revised arguments, knowing that Trump can no longer make his, as the "official position" of the current administration. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, an Amicus curiae or friend-of-the-court brief basically allows any third party, whether the current administration or some average Joe, to offer outside help to a court when it is considering a routine decision. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In this article I have found, it states that the Supreme Court's invitation to Biden's Justice Dept. for a revised position had no filing deadline or a mandatory order ... which means that the Justices could literally procrastinate/avoid making a decision on this hot-button issue indefinitely ... maybe that is the real reason for this ... Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Supreme Court is often reticent to decide issues which it considers to be political questions. The fact that a party to a case could arbitrarily argue both sides of the matter depending on which political party happens to be in power at the time seems to be a clear indication of the political nature of the question at hand, and thus the Court's shuffling-of-feet in response to having to deal with such things. --Jayron 32 14:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You make a good point. But, in this case, I don't think that the Justice Department is a party to the case. They are merely a third-party "looker on" / "observer". (I think?) In a case like this, there were probably dozens of amicus briefs included, from all sorts of organizations. Why would the Supreme Court go out and seek one amicus for clarification on their position ... but not all the other (presumably) dozens of amici? Also, if it's a "political question" ... can't the Supreme Court just say "this is a political question ... so we don't get involved". They've done that before. Also, this really can't be a political question ... (out of reach of the Court) ... since they have already addressed it many, many, many times in past precedent. No? 32.209.55.38 (talk) 17:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here ya go: Solicitor General of the United States § Call for the views of the solicitor general. --47.155.96.47 (talk) 02:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Swift J, and Woolmington v DPP

In our article Woolmington v DPP we read that "At the Bristol Assizes, Judge Swift ruled that the case was so strong against him [Woolmington] that the burden of proof was on him to show that the shooting was accidental. The jury deliberated for 69 minutes. On February 14, 1935 he was convicted (and automatically sentenced to death)" Is this Swift Rigby Swift? Thanks, DuncanHill (talk) 15:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, according to this. DuncanHill (talk) 16:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A mysterious poem

Google has failed me, but perhaps one of you folks knows the answer. While reading Dr. Thorndyke's Casebook - specifically the story called "The Touchstone" - I came across a few lines of unattributed poetry. The poem quoted involves a character referred to as an "aged, aged man" who "Sometimes searched the grassy knolls, For wheels of hansom cabs." It sounded interesting and I wanted to read the whole thing, but as I said, Google failed to produce any results outside the Casebook itself. Does it ring a bell for anyone? Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 19:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First hit from Google is Haddocks' Eyes. Matt Deres (talk) 19:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, it was searching for "searched" instead of "search" that led to null results. Thanks! Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 19:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, but I just copied this text from your post into Google: Sometimes searched the grassy knolls, For wheels of hansom cabs. Matt Deres (talk) 19:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was doing an exact search (i.e. with quotes around the phrase) because I - foolishly - assumed that R. Austin Freeman had checked his source to make sure he was quoting it correctly. Obviously not. Dr. Thorndyke would be ashamed. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 22:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was Jervis quoting it, so the error is his, not Freeman's. DuncanHill (talk) 23:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the page in Google Books, I think it's arguably not an error. It's laid out this way:

...I wandered among the bushes and the little open spaces, peering about me and reminding myself of that "aged, aged man" who

"Sometimes searched the grassy knolls

for wheels of hansom cabs."

He transposed the poem into the past tense because the aged, aged man did that at the time of the action in the poem, i.e. in the past. Imagine someone thinking of Fort McHenry and musing about whether "that star-spangled banner yet waved over the land of the free and the home of the brave". In recording that thought, you are thinking about the time of the battle, which is in the past, so you have to transpose the song lyrics into the past tense. In extremely picky writing, like an academic paper, you might indicate the change by using square brackets ("[waved]" or "[searched]") or by closing and reopening the quotation marks, but in a work of fiction I don't think that degree of pickiness is warranted. --184.145.50.201 (talk) 00:16, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. DuncanHill (talk) 00:18, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for defending Jervis's honor. The poor guy usually can't catch a break, it seems. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 01:21, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese imperial name and title

When referring to Hirohito in English, is "Showa Emperor" an alternate correct form of "Emperor Showa" or an error? I was under the impression that it was S.E., but the article seems to indicate that E.S. is the primary form. Nyttend backup (talk) 19:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In English, the usual order of a name-cum-title designation is "<title> <name>". In some languages, including Japanese, the order is "<name> <title>", so President Obama in Japanese is オバマ大統領 (Obama Daitōryō). Likewise, Hirohito became 昭和天皇 (Shōwa Tennō). There is no good reason to retain the Japanese order when translating this. --Lambiam 08:54, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

With Chinese emperors, apparently we use Whatever Emperor (e.g. Daoguang Emperor and Jiaqing Emperor), not Emperor Whatever, and in both cases they're era names (Japanese usage follows Chinese usage) rather than personal names, as if we used nicknames in European contexts, e.g. "Revolutionary Emperor" or "Indian Empress" for Napoleon I of France and Victoria of the UK, respectively. So I'm doubtful that it's merely a matter of English word order. Nyttend backup (talk) 12:39, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking at my Canadian Press style guide. While it doesn’t address Japanese names specifically, the principles and examples given show the ideal for the CP is to respect the form of a name that the individual prefers. Some quotes from the Names section: “In general, the names of people should be given in the spelling and form they normally use.” “In Chinese, Korean and many other Asian names, the family name comes first: Roh in Roh Tae-Woo. But westernized people often put the given name first: Morris Lee.” "For Arabic names, use an English spelling that approximates the way the name sounds in Arabic. If an individual has a preferred spelling in English, use it." "In transliterating a Russian name, use the English phonetic equivalent where one exists. But with Russiam emigre names, follow the individuals' preference." “For Spanish and Portuguese names, the only safe guide is the way the individuals use them.” 70.67.193.176 (talk) 18:00, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can't think of a worse name to use for this example than Morris Lee. Temerarius (talk) 19:08, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that the preference of Shōwa will provide guidance. Also, titles are not really part of the name. --Lambiam 19:30, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 16

Araft Institute

Is there such a thing as an Araft Institute that's involved in the Israel-Palestinian conflict? Fatah talks about such an organisation existing in 2005, but the cited source for this paragraph doesn't include the word "institute", and I'm wondering if "Araft" is an error for "Arafat". "Arafat Institute" gets few relevant Google results (one of the first results, from 2016, calls the institute "newly created"). "Araft Institute" has just fifteen hits, and while the top one is HaAretz from 2009, everything else is related either to Wikipedia or to a plastic surgery institute at Mount Vernon Hospital, so I'm not sure that the single HaAretz article is correctly spelled. Nyttend backup (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a diff and an archived version of an older ref, which also doesn't seem to mention "Araft" or "institute". It mentiones a chairman of Fatah's new platform. Personuser (talk) 18:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea; thank you. I've removed the sentence in question, since it demonstrably wasn't sourced and hasn't been since. Nyttend backup (talk) 18:21, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The disputed sentence is found almost the same in this news source, but with the spelling "Arafat Institute". It does not further explain what the Arafat Institute is, nor does it identify its chairman. --Lambiam 19:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is a "Yasser Arafat Foundation", that at least some later sources (improperly?) called "Institute", still needs a better source. Not sure if Nasser al-Qudwa was chairman in 2009, but his article needs a better/updated source too. Personuser (talk) 22:21, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the part of Arafat's birth name which is most similar to a western surname is actually "al-Qudwa" (formerly commonly transcribed "al-Kidwa") -- definitely not "Arafat"! AnonMoos (talk) 23:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Astrological aspects - how frequently do they occur in horoscopes?

Hi, I have read in one of Liz Greene's books ( I am sorry, I can't find the specific book now) that an astrological aspect between two planets occurs in about one in every 18 charts. For example, an aspect between the sun and Pluto would affect one in every 18 people. I cannot find anything to corroborate this, although given the status of the author, I have no reason to doubt it. It was not clear whether Liz Greene was commenting on an aspect in general, or whether it applied to a specific type of aspect, for example sun square Pluto. I think it is more likely to be the former. Is anyone on this site aware of this information or could point me in the right direction? Thanks Andrea2603 (talk) 19:51, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How about you read Astrology and find out how worthless it is. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:28, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This still makes an interesting math question and humanity needs an excuse to keep calling Pluto a planet. Personuser (talk) 22:37, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Natal Astrology (as opposed to Sun sign astrology which was introduced around 1930 purely as something to run in newspapers and boost readership) can be useful, but it doesn't of course work in the way traditionally assumed, that is through (non-existent) "influences" of the positions of planets, etc., on someone at their moment and place of birth or on the outcomes of some timed and dated event.

Instead (and this is admittedly Original Research), the process of drawing up the natal chart or horoscope of a subject (which need not be a person) and interpreting the results of its many interacting and multi-valued "influences", in conjunction with the astrologer's personal knowledge of the subject and of the world (sometimes combined with the subject's active participation in the process), allows the astrologer to utilise subconscious (and/or sometimes conscious) calculations to determine what courses of action might more usefully be pursued. (Relatedly, the Placebo and Nocebo effects work even if their subject knows that they are in operation.)

Similar mental processes in the practitioner (not the subject) can be tapped into by use of the I Ching, of Tarot card readings, and for that matter by Philip Pullman's fictitious Alethiometer, and doubtless other systems of recursively combined symbolism combined with intellectual introspection.

As Granny Weatherwax would say: "It's all headology." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.0.58 (talk) 00:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 258: / Line 258: @@
 ::This still makes an interesting math question and humanity needs an excuse to keep calling Pluto a planet. [[User:Personuser|Personuser]] ([[User talk:Personuser|talk]]) 22:37, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 ::[[Natal Astrology]] (as opposed to [[Sun sign astrology]] which was introduced around 1930 purely as something to run in newspapers and boost readership) ''can'' be useful, but it doesn't of course work in the way traditionally assumed, that is through (non-existent) "influences" of the positions of planets, etc., on someone at their moment and place of birth or on the outcomes of some timed and dated event.
-::Instead (and this is admittedly Original Research), the process of drawing up the natal chart or horoscope of a subject (which need not be a person) and interpreting the results of its many interacting and multi-valued "influences", in conjunction with the astrologer's personal knowledge of the subject and of the world, allows the astrologer to utilise subconscious (and/or sometimes conscious) calculations to determine what courses of action might more usefully be pursued. (Relatedly, the [[Placebo Effect|Placebo]] and [[Nocebo effect]]s work even if their subject knows that they are in operation.)
+::Instead (and this is admittedly Original Research), the process of drawing up the natal chart or horoscope of a subject (which need not be a person) and interpreting the results of its many interacting and multi-valued "influences", in conjunction with the astrologer's personal knowledge of the subject and of the world (sometimes combined with the subject's active participation in the process), allows the astrologer to utilise subconscious (and/or sometimes conscious) calculations to determine what courses of action might more usefully be pursued. (Relatedly, the [[Placebo Effect|Placebo]] and [[Nocebo effect]]s work even if their subject knows that they are in operation.)
 ::Similar mental processes ''in the practitioner'' (not the subject) can be tapped into by use of the ''[[I Ching]]'', of [[Tarot card reading|Tarot card readings]], and for that matter by [[Philip Pullman]]'s fictitious [[Alethiometer]], and doubtless other systems of recursively combined symbolism combined with intellectual introspection.
 ::As [[Granny Weatherwax]] would say: "It's all [[Granny Weatherwax#Headology|headology]]." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/2.122.0.58|2.122.0.58]] ([[User talk:2.122.0.58|talk]]) 00:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC)