Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:59, 12 September 2021

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/M

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.

September 6

Shooting someone who's burning alive

I've had this weird question in my mind for a while. Imagine a police officer arrives at a car accident scenes and someone is trapped in the car. The car catches fire and the person starts burning. Would it be "legal" for the police officer to shoot that person to end their sufferings or could they be prosecuted? Ericdec85 (talk) 03:11, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Removed own post, accidentally duplicated due to confusing edit conflict: see below. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.121.112 (talk) 15:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)][reply]

Specifically, it's going to depend on the jurisdictions laws regarding mercy killing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:47, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Edit Conflict] The legality would likely depend on the particular jurisdiction involved, i.e. where geographically the incident occurred, and possibly other circumstances as well.

(For what it's worth, in the worst rail disaster in Britain, in 1915, one of the three trains involved was carrying about 500 troops. The mostly wooden wreckage caught fire and many were trapped with no hope of being pulled free or of the fire being extinguished. It is fairly certain that at least one of their officers shot a number of the soldiers in order to give them a merciful death, but no official efforts were made to confirm this, identify him/them, or to bring any prosecution.

The military aspect of the situation (in the middle of World War One) may have had some bearing, particularly as all the officers of Her Majesty's Railway Inspectorate, responsible for investigating rail accidents, were at that time (and for long after) ex-members of the Corps of Royal Engineers. The fact that the accident happened in Scotland, but a number of the victims died after having been moved to England, was also a potential complication as the two countries had, and still have, entirely separate legal systems. The signalmen responsible for the accident were prosecuted in Scotland.)

In the UK, actions which potentially could be prosecuted by the State are sometimes not when a prosecution is deemed to be "not in the Public interest" (about which Wikipedia seems to have no article or mention, though perhaps it should): I suspect this would apply today in the scenario Ericdec85 describes. How this would play out in other jurisdictions others must address. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.121.112 (talk) 03:54, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's deja vu all over again. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:01, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Accidental duplication resolved :-). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.121.112 (talk) 15:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)][reply]

If someone felt obligated to murder people as more merciful than letting them burn, he could avoid prosecution by saving the last bullet for himself, even is his life was not in danger. This would reduce incidents of murder-happy people going around and shooting injured or dying people for the sheer hell of it. Edison (talk) 21:06, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would a genuinely merciful person (a) seriously consider the possibility of subsequent prosecution at the time of their mercy killing and (b) deem killing themself afterwards to be preferable to possible prosecution and their affirming that they thought they had done the moral thing and allowing their peers to judge them (as I hope I would in a situation such as Quintishill)?

How many incidents of someone shooting already injured or dying people as a cover for recreational murder can you instance? If none (as I suspect), it seems a bit much to expect person X to kill themselves in order to discourage some unknown person in the future from committing a theoretical crime whose actual previous commission person X will never have heard of. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.121.112 (talk) 00:50, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Euthanasia "is the practice of intentionally ending life to relieve pain and suffering". In this particular form where there is no consent by the victim, it would seem to be illegal just about everywhere, although I imagine courts might take a sympathetic view. Police officers in the UK don't routinely carry guns, so this form of first aid seems unlikely here. Alansplodge (talk) 20:53, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If lifesaving is impossible and they're making blood-curdling screams presumably they wouldn't have minded. The cop could waste what feels like an eternity getting the guy to notice his presence (not sure if I'd notice even a gunshot to the ground when I'm melting) or move the inevitable a few seconds. Even in the wilderness at 4am it doesn't hurt to chant help me and when you're ready kill me just in case. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:17, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see the moral case, but the question is over legality. According to our article, even in countries where euthanasia is legal, consent is required along with other safeguards. Ultimately, it would be up to a court to decide what to do. Alansplodge (talk) 12:46, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There seem to be quite a few documented cases of mercy killing in war zones, some of which have come to trial and resulted in convictions. It's illegal; the Geneva Conventions are pretty clear that you can't kill anyone who is no threat, they are ratified by most states, and there does not seem to be a widely-proposed alternative law (partly due to practical difficulties in determining risk of death and motivation). But it is often socially accepted, meaning people don't talk about it publicly, and no legal action is taken, or much lighter punishments are given than for a malicious killing.[1] So both moral beliefs and social dynamics play a role in the de facto legal consequences. Few will persecute an illegal act which they consider moral. When a dying person is suffering, and witnesses emphasize, they may all feel a relief of suffering when one of them kills the dying person. See alturism and psychological egoism. Battlefields full of cheap sensors now make it less likely that killings will simply go unreported. This is a controversial issue because we're generally against both killing people and permitting needless suffering (animal euthanasia is less controversial as the law, and most people's morals, permit killing animals for all sort of reasons). Nor is it new; there's a discussion, which also raises political issues with killing superiors and death sentences, in 2 Samuel 1. HLHJ (talk) 19:36, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Haiti

Is Haiti in Latin America? Heegoop 16:45, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Read Latin America. It will tell you. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 22:13, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I trust the first "contemporary definition" over the "more literal" one, it's too French, even now. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:35, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While reading a source that uses the term, I trust the definition used by the source over any other. --Lambiam 09:37, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

French is a Latin-based language, as are Spanish and Portugese. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:03, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So Quebec is Latin America too? --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 13:56, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe. How far south of the Mexican border are they? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:38, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not far enough, probably, but Louisiana is arguably a good country mile beneath the California-Baja California border. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Like every definition and every category that people create to organize anything, there are "fuzzy edges" in these terms, and not everyone agrees on the same definitions. Haiti is one of those places that lies in the fuzzy edges. Some people following some definitions would consider it part of Latin America, while other people following other definitions don't. There is no simple, universal "yes/no" answer here. But yes, the article Latin America explains the differences and also explains why some countries are in those fuzzy edges. --Jayron 32 14:41, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 8

Someone has hacked Wikipedia for political reasons

On the Larry Elder#Radio page, Someone has altered the page to make it into a political hack job against California governor hopeful Larry Elder. Lying, lying by intentional omission, is supposedly not what Wikipedia is all about. It's time to remove that page and find out who did this.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2d80:f08a:7c00:8dbe:d3be:6117:af10 (talk • contribs)

If you have reliable sources that show the information in that section to be false, you should raise the issue at the article talk page, Talk:Larry Elder. --Jayron 32 18:23, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A political hack job against a political hack^{[citation needed]}? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:40, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Information that does not comply with our BLP policy, whether true or not, may be summarily removed. However, if the problem is (as alleged) lying by intentional omission, the remaining information may be all unproblematic. But here is not the place to discuss problems with the article. I assume that in the sentence "It's time to remove that page", the term "page" refers to the section Larry Elder § Radio and not to the whole article Larry Elder. Requests for deleting the whole article should go to Wikipedia:Requests for deletion. --Lambiam 09:15, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion Re donations

I have auto-donated monthly for several years, and when asked during your fund drives to donate there is no box to check that I already donate!! So I either have to ignore the plea or check no or maybe later, all of which are unacceptable to me. So please add a box for those who are already passionate to keep wiki free! -- 184.190.170.25

How would the system know who you are? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:38, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you create an account then you can disable fundraising banners at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-centralnotice-banners. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:18, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you also familiarize yourself with Wikimedia_Foundation#Finances.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:37, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think this question has come up before, in the ref desks too. The advice is always the same: "create an account." That's usually when the conversation stops. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:29, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 10

wHy LiKe tHis?

In chat(or wherever) what is the implication of typing in alternating caps sOmeThInG lIkE tHiS? Is there a term for that? 107.15.157.44 (talk) 21:54, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See alternating caps.-gadfium 22:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! (Wikipedia really does have an article on eVeRyTHiNG). 107.15.157.44 (talk) 23:26, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 11

Are there any current, accepted theories about memories and dreams?

I had a dream last night about a teacher I once had a very long time ago. Why did this memory surface? Are there any ideas? It seems so strange to me. I was not thinking about this teacher, it just happened, for no reason. Viriditas (talk) 08:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As for generally accepted theories, I think the idea that dreams are just dreams so forget them is good enough for most people. Not good enough for a longtime student like you, though, I gather. Are you looking for neurological reasoning or something based more in psychology, folklore or pseudoscience? InedibleHulk (talk) 10:46, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Searching for "memory surfacing" just produced a lot of nonsense about regression and past lives, so that was disappointing because it's potentially a serious question: why do irrelevant, distant memories surface sometimes when we are relaxed or dreaming? If Viriditas is (not to put too fine a point on it) old, this may be an example of the Reminiscence bump. There's also Flashback (psychology). Card Zero (talk) 13:35, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if this addresses the question directly, but see Relationship between Dreaming and Memory Reconsolidation. Alansplodge (talk) 16:37, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, everyone, for your answers. I will review the links. This discussion made me realize what I think is causing this. About ten years ago, I experimented with large doses of vegan omega-3 supplements. The same thing happened with my dreams, but I forgot about it. Well, recently, I started taking the omega-3 supplements again, and voilà. It occurs to me, that the reason I stopped taking the omega-3 supplements a decade ago is because the dreams became too intense to handle. Viriditas (talk) 00:53, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's fascinating. I googled the subject, and there is a belief (not necessarily proven) that Omega-3 has some impact on the vividness of dreams. I'm thinking to go off Omega-3 myself, and see if there's any impact. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:08, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 12

pole of inaccessibility of the United States

Where is the point of pole of inaccessibility of the United States? mean the location farthest from coastline to sea or ocean, or land border? Of course, United States portions of Great lakes are included as part of terrotory.

I guess it is near Topeka, Kansas, but I uncertain the correctness of the answer.Hmht45tgree3d (talk) 18:29, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: not about continental of North America, I said the country of the United States.

Lebanon,_Kansas is the geographic center of the U.S., is that what you are looking for? RudolfRed (talk) 19:57, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to pole of inaccessibility, land borders (i.e. between US and Canada) are not considered (I think); so "pole of inaccessibility of the United States" might be undefinable. 107.15.157.44 (talk) 21:58, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fonts on sign for date

Can anyone identify the fonts or any other dating information on this sign? For details, see Commons:Category talk:Instructions for using electric lights. Thank you! HLHJ (talk) 20:00, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 101: / Line 101: @@
 : [[Lebanon,_Kansas]] is the geographic center of the U.S., is that what you are looking for?  [[User:RudolfRed|RudolfRed]] ([[User talk:RudolfRed|talk]]) 19:57, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
-According to  [[pole of inaccessibility]], land borders (i.e. between US and Canada) are not considered (I think); so "pole of inaccessibility of the United States" might be undefinable.  [[Special:Contributions/107.15.157.44|107.15.157.44]] ([[User talk:107.15.157.44|talk]]) 21:58, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
+:According to  [[pole of inaccessibility]], land borders (i.e. between US and Canada) are not considered (I think); so "pole of inaccessibility of the United States" might be undefinable.  [[Special:Contributions/107.15.157.44|107.15.157.44]] ([[User talk:107.15.157.44|talk]]) 21:58, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 == Fonts on sign for date ==