Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:35, 8 April 2022

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.

April 1

What does 'cultural pathology' means?

I did come across terms 'cultural pathology', 'Culturopathy' and 'Culturopath'.

Are those related terms to each other,
What do those mean ?
Relationship with Irrational beliefs, if any?

Thanks Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 06:13, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may find this interesting:[1] --<-Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots-> 06:36, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bookku -- In the United States, the concept of cultural pathology was popularized by the Moynihan report (though I'm not sure whether it used that exact phrase). To my mind, a more valid example is the society explained in the book "The Moral Basis of a Backward Society"... -- AnonMoos (talk) 07:01, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In medical jargon, -path, -pathy, and -pathology all refer to diseases (see [2]), from the Greek meaning "to suffer". (the ending also appears in terms like "empathy" and "sympathy", meaning roughly "to suffer with" and "to suffer alongside"). In the medical sense, you see terms like "neuropathy", meaning "disease of the nerves", for example. When I do a google search for your terms, they all seem to relate, in a metaphorical sense, to the medical uses, so something that is "culturopathic" is a "diseased culture", and it seems to refer to harmful cultures or cultural practices. See, for example, [3] "We can use the term 'culturopathic' to describe any culture that results in harm", or [4] "Culturopathy is the "pathology" of an intersubjective system. When individuals or groups of people experience pathology in their social dimension". Since pathology is the study of the causes and effects of disease, the term "cultural pathology" seems to be used to indicate "the study of diseases of a culture", which is to say the attempt to diagnose the causes and effects of harmful practices within a culture, a very closely related term, "Social pathology", is defined here in ways that I am seeing the term "cultural pathology" used in various Google searches (though I can't find an overt definition.) --Jayron 32 12:19, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly certain you meant "medical" jargon, but medial does make for an amusing typo as it ties in to your later points (and onward to pathologization). Matt Deres (talk) 15:35, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So corrected. --Jayron 32 15:41, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I think these terms have no precise meaning. By equating an aspect of a culture to a sickness, people who use terms like cultural pathology or culturopathy do so to flag it as something one should condemn. It is a form of swearing using printable words. A culturopath would be a person who is culturally aligned with a culturopathy. --Lambiam 12:31, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

African countries and death penalty and Islam.

I'm looking at death penalty in Africa, and Egypt it a big player for the death penalty. The countries that still have the death penalty appear to be Islamic countries to me. Just out of curiosity, what Islamic countries are against the death penalty? Even outside of Africa? And, I imagine you can't define all countries as 100% Islam or not, so could there be African countries against the death penalty but are only partially Islamic? (Not an April Fool's joke question.). 67.165.185.178 (talk) 10:28, 1 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Well there isn't any Capital punishment in Albania. There's a short discussion at Capital punishment in Islam#Capital punishment in Muslim-majority nations, and Muslim world gives you demographics to help you decide what you want to call an Islamic country. Card Zero (talk) 11:22, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Morocco is another example. I suggest you take a look at Capital punishment by country. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was also fascinated with jurisdictions that recently decided to bring back the death penalty. Afaik, that has never happened in the U.S. states before. But I saw this in the chronology excerpt article: "Where a country has abolished, re-instated, and abolished again (e.g. Philippines, Switzerland, Portugal, Italy) only the later abolition date is included. Countries which have abolished and since reinstated (e.g. Liberia) are not included."

So it looks like only 5 countries have decided to bring back the death penalty, but 4 of them got rid of if for a 2nd time. 67.165.185.178 (talk) 11:52, 1 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

If the bloodthirsty leader of a coup overthrowing the democratically elected government reinstates capital punishment, can one say then that "the country" decided to bring back the death penalty? --Lambiam 14:23, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The Country" means many different things, but in the context of "The country <has a certain law>" the context means "The state" and not "the population". Insofar as the leadership of a coup has taken control of the machinery of state and is acting as the government of said country, and is able to enforce their position as such, then in this context, that's "The country". Saying "Freedonia decided to bring back the death penalty" doesn't mean that all of the people collectively and with one mind made such a decision, it means "The state/government of Freedonia decided to", and insofar as a group of people has the power to enact and enforce such statutes, they are the de facto state/government of Freedonia. How they got that power (by election, by inheritance, or by force) may have some effect on how people feel about them, but the reality of their power doesn't change based on feelings. This is covered quite well in the wikipedia article Sovereignty. --Jayron 32 15:48, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no issue with a factual formulation like, "the country reinstated the death penalty". But if the verb "decide" is used, I find it less appropriate in such a situation to use "the country" as its subject. If the authoritative dictator exercising sovereignty suffered from indecisiveness-induced insomnia, one would also not write, "after many sleepless nights, the country decided ...". This issue is not dealt with in the article Sovereignty. --Lambiam 22:24, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anthropomorphising corporate entities such as companies, organizations, governments, and yes, countries, is a common enough thing in English. The fact that an abstract concept does not possess an independent brain doesn't mean that we don't use words like "decide" based on the the actions undertaken by people and done in the name of that entity. To say something like "The company decided to enter a new market" is well understood to mean "The people who are in a decision making capacity in the company so decided". It's the same with country. We all understand that a country has no corporeal existence, that it is not a person with a brain and a body, and that real people with real brains and bodies do the work of making decisions for that country. --Jayron 32 13:51, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

67.165.185.187 -- There was a pause in the U.S. due to Furman v. Georgia (1972-1976), after which some states brought the death penalty back... AnonMoos (talk) 14:59, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What play did Margaret Lloyd George see several times?

In a letter dated 5th March, on 10 Downing Street notepaper, Margaret Lloyd George writes:

Dear Mr Grossmith,
Thank you so much for the chocolates last night. It was kind of you to send them. We thoroughly enjoyed the play. I have seen it several times, and we often hear it on the electro phone here in Downing Street.
With renewed thanks from me & my daughter & son & future daughter in-law all in the box last night
Yours v sincerely
M. Lloyd George

I would like to know the play! We can narrow things down a bit: Now, the Lloyd Georges moved into No. 10 in December 1916, and left in October 1922. George Grossmith died in 1912, so Mr Grossmith must be his brother Weedon Grossmith, who died on the 14th June 1919. I would think the daughter will be Olwen, and the son and future daughter in-law Richard and Roberta, who were married on 7 April 1917. Gwilym was not married until 1921. So I think that gives us March 1917. The electro phone was an apparatus for listening to plays, concerts, church services, and the like, over the telephone line. I rather think that Grossmith was the lessee of Terry's Theatre at the time, so it is possible that he wasn't actually in the play. So - can anyone name the play? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 15:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's George Grossmith Jr., who co-wrote The Bing Boys Are Here which played at the Alhambra on Saturday March 3rd 1917 - or at least that's what I make of the following bad OCR from The Stage published on the first of March: "The Otter Bmg Boys . Mr . Oswald StolJ will presenit Grossmith and Laurillard ' s revue , ' The Bihg Boys , on Saturday crrcning". I suppose this is wrong because it was a revue, and thus too lowbrow and musical to call a play. (Also because the 3rd is not the 4th and thus is not "last night".) Card Zero (talk) 16:14, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You might play with the British Newspaper archive advanced search. For example, trying the keywords Weedon Grossmith, setting the publication place to London and the date from March 1 to 4, 1917, I found this snippet from the Daily Mirror for March 3 under “London Amusements”: “... IRENE VANBRUGH as Norali Marsh. Matinee, Thursdays and Saturdays. at 2.30. LAYHOUSE. 2.30 and 8.30. THE MISLEADING LADY. Weedon Grossmith, Malcolm Cherry. atinees. Thursday and Saturdays, at 2.30. (Ger. 3 9701 UEEN'S, W. THE DOUBLE EVENT. A New Four-Act ...”. Don’t have subscription though, for actual article you’ll need WP:RX. The Misleading Lady is mentioned in Weedon Grossmith’s article. (didn’t try George) 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Malcolm Cherry and Gladys Cooper in The Misleading Lady, "is whimsically declared to be amusing just because it is crude. Yet it is impossible not to like The Misleading Lady". 46.102.221.177 (talk) 17:17, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

George Grossmith Jr changes our timeframe - it could then be any 5th March from 1917 up to and including 1921. Indeed "son and future daughter in-law" would make sense for Gwilym and Edna 1921 (they married in June). That was a Saturday, so last night would be a Friday. Thinking about it, a Sunday in wartime does seem unlikely for Margaret to be going to a show. In 1921 George Jr was in partnership with Edward Laurillard at (I think) the Apollo, the Shaftesbury, and the Winter Garden. By 1921 Olwen was in India (and indeed gave birth to Eluned on the 3rd March) so the daughter would have been Megan. DuncanHill (talk) 19:00, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Right, same archive search for George Grossmith in London in the first five days of March 1921 returns The Naughty Princess: "THE NAUGHTY PRINCESS. tJ W. H. BERRY. Lily St. John. Amy Augarde. GEORGE GROSSMITH. Nightly, at 8. Mats. Wed. Sat., at 2". Better? 70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah thank you! Yes, that looks good. DuncanHill (talk) 19:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very fun question! 70.67.193.176 (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2

Is there anyone notable with a negative view of world government?

The world government article says "World government has both supporters and detractors from across the political and ideological spectrum", yet so far as I can see it doesn't specify any detractors. It lists a series of people who seem either resigned to the inevitability of world government (whether under fascism, communism, or as a federation) or positively joyous about it. I don't see so much as a note of caution anywhere in the article, have I not read closely enough? Card Zero (talk) 00:08, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Right-wingers in the U.S. have railing against evil plots to establish an oppressive world government for many decades. Almost everybody who supports a United States withdrawal from the United Nations thinks world government would be a bad idea. See also New World Order (conspiracy theory)... AnonMoos (talk) 00:19, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether they would oppose the creation of a global United States. Card Zero (talk) 00:44, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That seems rather irrelevant -- whether a U.S. government which expanded to the whole globe allowed people outside the current 50 states to vote or not, the result would be a very different system than the U.S. as it exists now. Most of the people who want to withdraw from the United Nations are somewhat nostalgic for the U.S. relationship to world affairs as it existed before WW2, when the U.S. could to a significant degree shelter behind the two oceans -- and your scenario is the exact opposite of that... AnonMoos (talk) 11:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like isolationism, and not like a principled concern about the effects of world government on the world. Card Zero (talk) 12:09, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice -- you didn't ask about people who oppose a world government for one specific reason, so I answered the question you originally asked. AnonMoos (talk) 23:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for an entirely valid answer, it's just that I didn't think adding isolationists to the article would do much to balance it. (Let alone conspiracy theorists.) I mean, if they have a reasoned opinion about world government, rather than mere nostalgia for a comfortable domestic situation, then yes. Card Zero (talk) 09:16, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many of them would call themselves Paleoconservatives, though some might not object to an isolationist label... AnonMoos (talk) 21:29, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, one of the principal gripes of Brexit supporters (again mostly on the right, but some on the left too) was that the EU was leading inevitably towards a United States of Europe. Presumably World Government would be even less acceptable, although as far as I can tell, it's not a live topic here. 46.102.221.177 (talk) 11:12, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchists are also not enthusiastic about the idea. Any democratically governed polity may become authoritarian and even totalitarian, whether by a power grab or by the erosion of democratic sentiment. Can anyone offer an iron-clad guarantee that a world government cannot become stuck in brutal totalitarianism? Without such guarantee, I think anyone, whether left or right, should oppose the idea of a world government. --Lambiam 12:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Telling that we have "right-wingers" and anarchists so far opposed to a cast of supporters that runs from Dante to Roddenberry. Right there with you as to totalitarianism, but multilateralism and unilateralism are equally good reading all considered. We'll soon be talking "end of history" and WP:Recentism. fiveby(zero) 14:47, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I found Kenneth Waltz and his Theory of International Politics. (If he was an anarchist, he was a very sober one.) "World government, according to Waltz, would not deliver universal, disinterested, impartial justice, order or security, but like domestic governments, it would be driven by its own particular or exclusive organizational interests, which it would pursue at the expense of the interests and freedom of states. This realist view thus provides a sobering antidote to liberal and other progressive narratives that foretell peace through interdependence." Card Zero (talk) 16:45, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn't realize you were working on the article. John Mearsheimer, here's The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. You might do better starting with E. H. Carr The Twenty Years Crisis instead of dividing into proponents and opponents. "Liberals and Realists", "Realist Foreign Policy", and "Realism" from Oxford Bibliographies. fiveby(zero) 13:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was definitely planning on feeling guilty about not working on the article, at any rate. I think I might start a section called "Criticism", or maybe "Realist Critics" – it seems like realism is the general umbrella term for these viewpoints? Card Zero (talk) 14:19, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will Smith-Chris Rock slapping incident

Re: Will Smith–Chris Rock slapping incident. I am a little confused about this situation. I'd like to know if anyone can clear this up for me. Thanks in advance.

The latest update, in a nutshell, is this: Smith resigned his membership with the Academy; nonetheless, the Academy will continue its investigation to administer whatever discipline / sanctions it deems appropriate.

So, the Academy is a private organization. Will Smith is a private citizen, with absolutely no ties to the organization. (He is no longer a member; he resigned his membership.) What possible discipline or sanctions can an organization have in a scenario such as this?

In other words, how would a private organization (like, for example, the Academy) have any "jurisdiction" or "control" over any private citizen (like, for example, Will Smith)?

Since he is not a member of their organization, he does not have to abide by anything they say. There is nothing whatsoever that they can possibly do to him, as he has no relationship with them, and he -- as a private citizen -- is not "under their control" nor subject to any of their rules, decisions, discipline, sanctions, etc. Am I missing something? The whole thing makes no sense. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 06:08, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Academy has to follow due process. The fact that he has resigned doesn't relieve them of their responsibility to carry out disciplinary proceedings for violations of their standards of conduct. Just because they can't sanction him any more is no reason not to go through their internal procedures. I see it as similar to the situation when someone is sentenced to life imprisonment and then also convicted of some other crime for which they will serve their sentence concurrently. There's no additional penalty for the second crime, but that's no reason not to charge, prosecute and sentence them for it. --Viennese Waltz 06:32, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph_A._Spadaro -- they could prevent him from attending or presenting at future awards ceremonies, or declare him ineligible to receive future awards. AnonMoos (talk) 11:53, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They could, for example, demand that he give the Oscar statuette back. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:02, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to have been written before Smith resigned, [5]. AFAICT, only two of the possible specific punishments are precluded by Smith resigning; expulsion and suspension. Although I'm not sure if service and volunteer roles require you to be a member of the Academy, it's possible they do so his resignation already preclude that but maybe they don't. As AnonMoos said, he could be excluded from ceremonies (and other events or activities) and from future awards or honours. A notable point is that Smith would normally present the best actress award next year. As for BB's point, it's another possibility albeit suggested as unlikely. One thing not specifically clarified is whether the Academy can demand the statue is returned with some legal backing. I suspect they can, but either way they can at least revoke the award. On the expulsion and suspension point, while it isn't specifically mentioned it seems likely whether under expulsion/suspension or the exclusion thing or “other sanctions that the Academy in its sole discretion may deem appropriate”; Smith could be temporarily or permanently banned from the Academy i.e. could not rejoin even if he wanted too. Note the fact that Smith was a member of the Academy during the whole thing may further complicate things, see for example this fairly unrelated and old (i.e. possibly out of date) legal case surrounding whether a fine issued by a union to someone who was a member at the time but left to avoid paying it, is legally enforceable [6]. (Edit as I also wrote below, I'm not suggesting this is a likely punishment, it might not even be possible given the Academy's constitution etc. But the OP's question seem generalised asking about what an organisation could do about someone who is no longer a member but was when when the events of the disciplinary proceeding happened.) Nil Einne (talk) 17:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not even think of the "tradition" whereby the Best Actor winner of the prior year presents the Oscar to the Best Actress winner of the following year. Wow, that will be awkward at the 95th ceremony next year. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:21, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Given recent history I should emphasise the Academy is well known for being not a union indeed it was initially anti-union. Also while researching this answer I found out that the SAG-AFTRA has also opened disciplinary proceedings into Will Smith. However my answer is not a comment on them in any way, I avoided opening any of the many links I came across even though it's possible they would have helped since I wanted to avoid any suggestion I was talking about Will Smith and the SAG-AFTRA or any other union.

Fines aside, the limits of what unions can do is perhaps a useful comparison as to what sanctions an organisation can legally do which may affect a non member. I vaguely recalled reading during some entertainment strike in the US that even non union strike breakers were affected. I thought I read they might be prevented from working on future union productions but after a lot of research I'm fairly sure this is wrong.

A union may forbid someone from joining the union and some unions did say they would do so to non members [7], or alternatively ban them for a certain period [8]. But even for a union shop beyond the loss of any union benefits the most that is supposed to happen in terms of future job prospects, is they still have to pay the dues or even only the parts related to collective bargaining etc while not being part of the union. Note that the union shop is fairly universal among unions in the entertainment field in the US and the most you get since the closed shop is forbidden under the Taft–Hartley Act. Anyway if they pay what's needed, at least theoretically, they aren't supposed to be discriminated against because they aren't part of the union etc. See [9] which while an anti-union site concurs with our messy extremely pro union Financial core, [10] and other things I've read.

The fi-core is extremely controversial in the entertainment field as it allows people to work on union jobs while also working on non-union jobs something prevented by most entertainment unions in states without right to work laws, see e.g. [11]. Mostly this relates to people who join the union and then leave under the fi-core system, but AFAICT, this applies to those who were never members because they're not allowed to join, and those who leave for other reasons or are banned after joining, so I'm fairly sure Deadline is right here [12]. (As per the NRTW site and my earlier link, they may still be subject to disciplinary action for stuff they did while members.)

However one thing I wasn't able to definitely answer is whether unions can effectively black list someone for reasons unrelated to their membership [13]. There is the infamous albeit very old Hollywood blacklist, and more recently Harvey Weinstein was said to have black listed people for illegitimate reasons, which implies that there must be legitimate ones.

In other words, can an organisation require that their members don't work with a person under possibly penalty of themselves being subject to disciplinary proceedings? Both before and after research, the answer seems likely to be "it depends on why, their constitution, etc". (To be clear I see no chance the Academy or for that matter the SAG-AFTRA will forbid members from working with Will Smith. My point wasn't the chance of this happening, but instead on what powers an organisation may have against someone who isn't a member.)

Nil Einne (talk) 21:43, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My initial reaction -- when I heard the news of Smith's resignation was this. Smith knew that -- pretty much -- the worst that they (the Academy) could do was to expel him or to suspend him of his AMPAS membership. Once he's not a member (i.e., if he were to resign), they (AMPAS) don't have a lot of options to "discipline" a non-member. So, he resigned ... almost as a cagey, sneaky, clever, pre-emptive strike ... to "de-fang" the Academy of its most serious possible consequences. That was my thinking. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:27, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Resigning doesn't always get you off the hook [14]. 80.44.92.176 (talk) 10:30, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can I resubmit it?

Draft:Meena-Mina controversy -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 10:05, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've posted your question in the wrong place. This page is for general knowledge questions, you want Wikipedia:Help desk. --Viennese Waltz 10:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What about Eena and Mo? --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:02, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Muscovite–Novgorod wars

What is the common English name, if any, for the 15th-century conflict between the Grand Duchy of Moscow and the Novgorod Republic? The Russian wiki has Московско-новгородские войны (Muscovite–Novgorod wars), but this doesn't appear to be a thing in English-language sources. I also checked the related Battle of Shelon and Marfa Boretskaya, but none names the war. Brandmeister^talk 14:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a 1967 journal article on "The Fate of the Novgorodian Republic" which calls the conflict "a number of military campaigns". Our article Novgorod Land says "Ivan III launched his first campaign against Novgorod in 1471", but Vasily the Blind's attack on Novgorod in 1456 should also be part of the thing you're trying to name. The term campaigns has some precendent, anyway. (Compare Livonian campaign against Rus'.) Something like "Russian campaigns against Novgorod" sounds reasonable to me, if it's correct to say Russian in this context (maybe Muscovian instead?) Card Zero (talk) 15:24, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the "Gathering of the Russian Lands" or Ivan III/Muscovite "conquest of Novgorod" seem the most common. You looking for an article title, or a descriptive phrase in other article content? fiveby(zero) 15:43, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm looking for an article title. Brandmeister^talk 07:38, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There does not appear to be a specific en.wikipedia article about said war. Parts of it are covered in articles such as Territorial evolution of Russia, the aformentioned Novgorod Land article, Ivan III of Russia#Territorial expansion, and Novgorod Republic#Fall of the Republic. --Jayron 32 15:44, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Psychology of Russian soldiers in Ukraine

So far, I have always had the understanding that the bulk of the Russian troops in Ukraine are young kids from the countryside who, blinded by propaganda, don't know any better. Now, in this article from a reliable German source (sorry that it's behind a paywall) I read that they are employing a number of practices, such as Double tap strike, which clearly violate even the most basic sense of humanity. (Yes, I know, there are signs of bad morale in the Russian troupes, but the majority still seems to support their Gröfaz (de).) I'm not writing this merely in order to vent my outrage - after all, coming from Germany, I am in no position to point the finger at other countries in this regard.

The goal of my question here is to reach some understanding. What is going on psychologically in these people? For the behavior of Nazi troops and concentration camp wardens, there are a number of concepts, such as xenophobia and racism, which can explain why they treated other human beings as animals, but these don't apply here, since Ukraine has been considered a "sister nation" for a long time. Sebastian 20:47, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of low-ranking cannon-fodder (especially in the northern areas of invasion) could be young recent recruits, while many of the higher-ups, or other personnel who have been in the Russian military for a long time, could be using in Ukraine tactics they previously used in Syria or Chechnya. There's not really a contradiction... AnonMoos (talk) 23:47, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your answer seems to assume a surgically clear distinction between those that “use” the tactics (by which I suppose you mean “decide”) and those who execute them. Is there such an impenetrable class system in the Russian forces? ◅ Sebastian 09:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're overinterpreting what I said. New recruits probably would be unlikely to use Chechnya or Syria tactics on their own initiative, but many of those who have been in Chechnya and Syria are likely to have fewer inhibitions. AnonMoos (talk) 21:32, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget that the oppressed Ukrainians are eager to welcome the Russian liberators but are held back from doing so by the fanatic genocidal neo-Nazis that fight against the heroic Russian army. Since only military sites are hit, pummeling them twice is only fair. --Lambiam 00:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's basically my question. If only a small fraction of the horrible pictures we have been seeing every day now is true, then there must be many soldiers who have seen the carnage inflicted on civilians. Or are you saying that people can be so indoctrinated that they can't distinguish a pram from a tank anymore? ◅ Sebastian 09:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The ones firing the rockets or dropping the bombs are distant from the locations where their weapons inflict their damage. So are we (at least I), but we see these painful images on the TV. I think they do not. --Lambiam 12:12, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Do what I say or I will lock up/torture/kill you/your family" turns out to often be a good motivator. The Schutzstaffel put an emphasis on recruiting "family men" because they were judged to be more reliable in following orders. --47.147.118.55 (talk) 01:37, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That may be a factor, but even so, in the end there should be – in a “special operation” that often has run out of control, where people on both sides are losing count of their dead, in a country where many people speak the same language – plenty of chances to escape the watchdogs without them knowing if you're dead or alive. Once people realize they're just cannon fodder for a fratricide, shouldn't the vast majority desperately seek such opportunities? ◅ Sebastian 09:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we should be drawing a parallel with the SS unless we have a source (see Godwin's law). Some points:

In all wars, it's necessary to portray the opponents as the "bad guys" and there is plenty of Russian propaganda claiming (possibly correctly) Ukrainian humanitarian violations during the prolonged fighting in the Donbas, which might be seen as justification.
In every society, there are aggressive and violent people and these traits are encouraged to an extent by military training where they are sometimes necessary. Western armies go to a great of trouble to keep these carefully channelled, but maybe this isn't so much of a concern for the Russians, and it seems they have severe command-and-control issues on the battlefield.
Just about every active army has been tainted with some major human rights breaches; Bloody Sunday, Mỹ Lai and Abu Ghraib spring to mind. Even the inoffensive Dutch have the Rawagede massacre and the Niš cluster bombing to their discredit. Alansplodge (talk) 09:06, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By way of a reference, The Psychology of War Crimes discusses why soldiers obey orders to mistreat people, but there may also be cases where the culture of an army (or a wider society) and a lack of supervision, encourages soldiers to commit war crimes on their own initiative, as at Abu Ghraib. Alansplodge (talk) 09:10, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Alansplodge, those are good points that give me food for thought. I especially appreciate the bigger perspective you're providing with the references to other situations around the globe. Would you have an example where the belligerents were close enough to consider each other something like a sister nation? ◅ Sebastian 09:27, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the American Revolutionary War or any civil war? ◅ Sebastian 09:42, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that nobody can come up with any comparable example, nor an explanation that leaves any chance to keep even an element of respect for the Russian side. At the same time we're seeing more and more extremely disturbing news in this matter. So it is with profound sadness that I am giving up any hope of contributing to peace by looking for the humanity of the perpetrators.

I'm not saying that no such path exists. Possibly someone studying The Psychology of War Crimes might find one. But that would be an achievement worthy of a Nobel Price for Peace – way above my league. ◅ Sebastian 05:00, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

'Humanity' and 'perpetrators' require exact definitions in this context and not any loose usage. In some senses the contribution to peace was made long ago, we do not "look" for the humanity of anyone, the very basis of liberalism is that we never deny it. fiveby(zero) 15:12, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your post is based on a misunderstanding. “Humanity” has more than one meaning – see Merriam-Webster. I meant meaning #1, you understood #2. Of course, I agree with you on meaning #2. ◅ Sebastian 20:11, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I've tried to ignore the OP's soapboxing but I just can't any more so yes I'll soapbox myself Nil Einne (talk) 14:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to ignore this but with the OP's latest post I just can't. I've said before I detest what is happening in Ukraine but I'm also deeply troubled by the OP's implications there's something somehow unique about what is going on in Ukraine beyond the fact it's a prosperous well developed European countries with a decent military. In addition to Fiveby's post, it's worth noting that according to our article, the inhumane (as per the OP) double tap strike has been used by the US in Pakistan and Yemen. As per Lambiam's point, I'm sure one justification the US has used is that they're all militants so it's fine. But this gets into how we actually know beyond blindly trusting the US or weird definitions sometimes used like everyone who has a weapon in a current as violent as those or especially Afghanistan or Iraq must be a militant.

If we stick with Yemen, while undoubtedly a lot of horrors are going on in Ukraine, there's a lot of horrors going on in Yemen too but generally ignored except for the occasional mention when it go too severe. These have mostly been committed by Saudi Arabia and/or the UAE along with the Houthis and (generally less directly) Iran, but the two former have often been using support and weapons from the West. This has often included maintenance of military aircraft etc. [15] (OTOH, the US seems quite willing to try and cut off all maintenance for Russian civilian aircraft when they can, including threatening anyone who tries with US sanctions. This may mean some who haven't banned Russian airlines will be forced to do so, but the more likely effect as with Iran is that they will continue to travel but with aircraft increasingly at risk of major incidents including crashes due to a lack of maintenance.)

The conflict in Yemen is an interesting case study in the complexity of relationships. As Houthi movement mentions, while they are Shia who have sometimes mistreated Sunni Muslims, they have allied with some at times too. They are also Arabs, as with most Yemenis. And it's not like the areas they control are exclusively Shia. I mean attacking a prison [16] may even mean killing those who have been mistreated for being Sunni. (To be clear, I'm not suggesting anyone involved knew it was a prison at the time.) Are these collateral damage, still not "sisterly" enough or ??? Beyond those directly killed in attacks, there are many again including many Sunni Arabs killed by starvation etc thanks in no small part to the Saudi Arabian blockade.

While okay, a lot of this is indirect e.g. the blockade and air attacks and there are fewer people on the ground, this has also meant it's easy for images etc to get out very fast. And despite the censorship in Saudi Arabia and to a less extent the UAE, it's been going on for so long, one would assume quite a few Saudi Arabians and Emiratis involved know about what's going on; but it still goes on. And yes, pan-Arabism is a somewhat recent development, there's still a fair amount of tribalism in those areas, but I think it's way too simplistic to suggest that's why people are fine with these deaths. Meanwhile major Western powers like the US and frankly even Germany clearly have the ability to tell Saudi Arabia to fuck off and override the blockade or do other stuff, but they don't. Although yes you could say racism and a lack of care about people who are seen as different or always dying or killing each other etc is one reason but then this also harks back to my first point about how what's going on in Ukraine isn't really unique. Since it's only so if you embrace such views.

And meanwhile, no one seems to know what to do about Afghanistan after the Taliban takeover and too few seem to care. While the Taliban may be horrors in many ways, it doesn't seem they're intentionally trying to starve or freeze their people, instead their takeover and no one wanting to deal with them means the Afghanistan economy has collapsed and most aid the relied on has dried up. Enough has been done to avoid the worse predictions for now [17], whether that's going to continue though, that doesn't seem clear.

The OP mention the US civil war, but while quite few civil wars involve people with different ethnicity or religions fighting each other, there are a lot of civil war and conflicts which involved other recent disputes generally political i.e. these are not centuries long views of each other as a foe. For example when South American dictators were torturing, throwing people out of airplanes often with the tactic support of the US and probably parts of Western Europe, this was generally mostly due to recent political differences. (And by no means were children etc spared these atrocities.) Korea and China/Taiwan are other disputes largely political. I won't bother to discuss Libya, Syria, Chechnya (both which has already came up), Egypt, Lebanon, Mali, Ethiopia or the hotbutton of them all Israel/Palestine but them and many other examples are worth looking in to if you think Ukraine is somehow an outlier nowadays in terms of what people are willing to do to each other when you convince them somehow the other side is the enemy.

Incidentally, in the early days of the Ukrainian conflict, there were ample reports of Ukrainian border guards etc preventing African and Indian non-citizen residents mostly students from leaving giving priority to white Ukrainians. While it wasn't totally clear from what I read how much this involved Polish officials, there were also reports of them being mistreated or threatened in Polish border towns. [18] Most of these people probably didn't want to stay in Poland anyway, I mean they wanted to continue their studies somewhere if possible and would have been fine doing that in Poland but in the absence of that then they'll probably have gone home. Showing how farcical this was, Nigeria at one stage suggested their citizens go to Hungary instead [19], where self-styled illiberal democrat Viktor Orban with his well known controversial views on migrants etc has now won re-election [20]. (Although it is true that Poland and Hungary have recently been competing to see who can annoy the EU etc the most with their policies including hardline stances on migration.)

I won't bother to discuss Belarus's attempts to use migrants to punish the EU and the Polish response including many reports of pushbacks and abuse which the EU seemed to have tactically accepted but it's something else worth looking into. [21]

Back to Ukraine, perhaps using molotovs cocktails [22] and poisoning soldiers with offered pastries [23] [24] is a form of legitimate resistance, but even if we put aside whether it'll be seen that way or instead terrorist attacks in a different conflict, it doesn't seem it will help Russian soldiers see civilians as civilians instead of deadly enemies. While this doesn't excuse atrocities committed, we've seen in many many conflicts, Afghanistan and Vietnam are obvious examples involving the West where ethnicity, religious or other differences aside; one factor which seems to have made forces involved willing to commit atrocities is they began to see everyone as the enemy in part because of how easy it was for someone who seemed a civilian to be a combatant.

And while it's hard to know in the fog of war, all reports suggest quite a few Russians military personnel have been killed. Vast majority may have been by Ukrainian military but ultimately if your comrades (collegues or even friends) are being killed, it doesn't seem that surprising your views on everyone on the other side may harden. While you may also blame your commanders to some extent, this tends to be more about preparation, tactics, planning etc. As mentioned by others above, military training often discourages anything thinking about the legitimacy of a conflict and especially that your side is the "evil" one. (I'm reminded of the FPS America's Army which was funded by the US government where for understandable reasons you were always the US Army even though as a classic team PvP FPS, the two teams were always on opposite sides.)

Alansplodge already mention this, but will Putin's de-Nazification is utter crap his claim about atrocities in the civil war by the Ukrainian side is mostly likely just serious overblown rather than utter bullshit. It's probably also worth looking into why the Azov Battalion was so successful. And the Ukrainians haven't been particularly friendly to Russian culture or language among their citizens in recent times. Yet it's perhaps not surprising there is mistrust and a hardening on views when there is a civil war and a divided territory, and this occurs on both sides.

And we also shouldn't ignore how someone's world view significantly affects what they see is happening. This relates to points made above by Lambiam and others, a number of the atrocities have been committed fairly remote. The theater bombing is one specific example which received a lot of attention for a time. But while it's easy for us to say how could you do that, they even wrote kids on the ground; it's also easy to imagine some of those involved thought and probably still think pull the other leg with your Ukrainian propaganda, what weapons are you hiding there?

That said though, I've also recently seen reports which answered one question I had before the conflict began namely how the Russian government who was seemingly up until not long before they attacked saying it was all Western propaganda etc would deal with the switch. At the time the US etc were suggesting a false flag attack but for whatever reason this never happened. Instead the Russians just seem to have just tried with suddenly emphasising the Nazi points etc. Anyway according to these reports one of the reasons for the low morale beyond the failures, deaths etc has been because there are a fair few on the ground who are confused about what they're doing given what they were told until very recently.

Nil Einne (talk) 14:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Before addressing the one point that goes in the direction of an answer to my question, allow me to clarify two misunderstandings here, in addition to the misunderstanding addressed above:

It never was my intent to step on any soapbox here. From the onset, the purpose of my question has been to reshape my understanding.
Nobody denies that terrible things are going on elsewhere in the world. I regard your long list as an expression of your compassion for these other parts of the world, and I wholeheartedly sympathize with you on this. You are absolutely right that these, too, are “worth looking in to”. You may feel I am biased to focus on this one conflict among so many. Please understand that this is just because I can't shoulder all problems of this world. There has been a time when I dedicated much more time to a conflict that's much closer to where you're from. Now's the time for me to be concerned about Europe.

The one point of yours which seems to be going in the direction of an answer to my question: “one factor which seems to have made forces involved willing to commit atrocities is they began to see everyone as the enemy in part because of how easy it was for someone who seemed a civilian to be a combatant”. There's something to that point, but there are two problems with it: ① It doesn't square with targeting children's hospitals and others that are clearly no combatants. ② It belies the very reason Russians have been told why they're there: To liberate the “sister nation”. ◅ Sebastian 20:11, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 3

What has been said about Mina Tribe in this book? Please try to tell.

^[1] -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 02:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Les civilisations de l'Inde".

You might get a quicker response at the French Wikipedia, as only a small proportion of responders on this English Wikipedia are likely to be both fluent French readers (thus able to translate to English accurately) and willing to take on such a not-inconsiderable task. Do you know if this Tribe is called "Mina" (or "Meena") in French, or something else? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.123.235 (talk) 06:47, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Page 128 in the book says: "Together With the Mhairs, Minas are half-savages from Rajputana. The two population are the links between the savage Bhils, and the Jâts, who are civilized. Together they number some several hundreds of thousand. Like the Bhils, they maintain fortified towns and hamlets. Many of them are "recruited" from outcasts from the Rajputs or the Jâts. They are today engaged in a fast accession to civilization. They are beginning to practice agriculture and they are adopting the brahmanic religion, but they still worship trees, stone altars, and iron, in the fashion of the Bhils. They adopted an hindi dialect, whereas Bhils from the inside are using a language similar to that of the Gonds." See Bhil people#History --Askedonty (talk) 10:03, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) In the caption of the photograph on page 131, as wel as elsewhere in the book, the Mina tribe is called a "half-savage tribe of Rajputana" (savage in the sense of not having a highly developed culture). In general, the discussion of the Mina is confined to Rajputana; they are mostly mentioned as one of three half-savage tribes of Rajputana, the Bhil, the Mhair and the Mina. (I cannot identify Mhair as any of the scheduled tribes.) The first mention is on page 86. The Mina are said there to occupy the Jaipur kingdom in the high Ganges basin, numbered 200,000 to 300,000. On pages 125 and 126 we read that while the "primitive element" dominates among the Bhil and is on equal footing with the "Turanian element" among the Mhair, the latter element dominates among the Mina. (These are old-fashioned racialist characterizations.) Page 128 tells us that the Mhair and Mina live in the Aravulli mountains in the heart of Rajputana, numbering several hundred thousand, where they build fortified villages. They may be ennobled by the admixture of the Rajputi and Jât races. Civilization is in rapid progress; they begin to cultivate the land and adopt Brahmanic worship. They speak a dialect of Hindi. --Lambiam 11:34, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The process of a "tribal" group formerly somewhat outside of Indian civilization adopting Hindu customs and entering the caste hierarchy near the bottom (but hoping to move up) is known as "Sanskritisation"... AnonMoos (talk) 22:22, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia as a source of novelty

Is it known that any musicians, writers or scholars have been inspired in their work by Wikipedia?
Possibly even scientists?--2A02:908:426:D280:7100:3AFC:91AC:329B (talk) 10:58, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Various aspects of Wikipedia have been the subject of scholarly research, as in [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], and many more. Of course, there are references to Wikipedia in works of fiction ([30], [31], [32], ...), but in these contexts one can hardly call it a source of inspiration. --Lambiam 12:06, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia: The Movie is coming out soon. The release date has had to be put back numerous times. The editing process has been a complete bitch. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The song Newport (Ymerodraeth State of Mind) references Wikipedia --TrogWoolley (talk) 11:33, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WHAAOE; see Wikipedia in culture for examples of the use of Wikipedia in song, film, writing, and MANY other places. --Jayron 32 11:55, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 5

Will India face Sri Lanka, Lebanon, Venezuela type nightmare situation?

Every day, the cost of petrol, diesel, vegetables, cooking oil, medicines, and fertilizers is increasing in India.

Some are saying Modi is doing it intentionally.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/price-of-petrol-and-diesel-hiked-again-total-increase-up-by-nearly-rs-10-in-2-weeks-2863084#pfrom=home-ndtv_bigstory

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/cost-of-living-rises-in-india-as-companies-pass-on-higher-prices/articleshow/90632305.cms

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/could-create-sri-lanka-like-situation-bureaucrats-on-populist-schemes-2860933

As stated at the top of this page, "We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate."--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:17, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are there British people identifying with their Norman ancestry?

It seems to be not only a stereotype that English people, in so far as they somewhat root themselves in history, primarily identify with their Anglo-Saxon ancestry, while many other inhabitants of the British Isles identify as Celts. Are there also British people identifying with their Norman heritage? Maybe the remaining native speakers of Jèrriais and Guernésiais? Others? --KnightMove (talk) 05:20, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some British aristocrats used to be proud to trace their genealogy to medieval Norman ancestors, but any distinction between Normans and Saxons as separate social groups in England disappeared many centuries ago. By the way, there were 5 linguistic groups in medieval Scotland at various times: Britons ("P"-Celtic speakers), Gaels ("Q"-Celtic speakers), Picts, Norse-speakers, and English-speakers... AnonMoos (talk) 10:08, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We have English surnames of Norman origin, but it's not a hot topic here as far as I know. Alansplodge (talk) 11:28, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There also needs to be a distinction between "has Norman ancestry, and knows about it" and "Is ethnically Norman". The Anglo-Normans as an ethnicity doesn't exist anymore. There is no longer any Anglo-Norman culture within England for them to share amongst themselves. --Jayron 32 12:19, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

However, a study published in 2011 apparently showed that people in England with surnames descended from Norman-French are on average about 10% richer [I am greatly simplifying] than those with non-Norman names. (Link to article in The Guardian, another to one from CNBC). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.123.235 (talk) 16:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense given that much of the nobility in Britain has such surnames. Families like the Howard, Beaufort (surname), Spencer (surname), all derive from Norman-French origins. --Jayron 32 11:01, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think (but might be mistaken) that the study intentionally avoided the inclusion of particularly rich people, and focussed on the "ordinary" population. A pdf of the study is easily googleable, but to be honest I did not want to spend the time downloading and reading it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.123.235 (talk) 16:19, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Even if one excludes "particularly rich" individuals, having an ancestor that had access to money and education and social connections also makes one more likely to have some of those advantages such things provide, even if on an absolute scale, one is not particularly rich. --Jayron 32 16:34, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's the point: the study suggests that those advantages have persisted to a still statistically measurable degree even over the best part of a millennium. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.123.235 (talk) 22:55, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some had the wisdom to celebrate their "Normanness". Clarityfiend (talk) 10:42, 6 April 2022 (UTC) [reply]

April 6

When does the Oklahoma anti-abortion bill activate?

Oklahoma has passed a new law criminalising abortion in several cases, and I just wanted to know when this bill would come into effect.

I'm not American, just so you know if it's important. BSMIsEditing (talk) 06:51, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The bill first has to be signed into law by the Governor, who has announced in advance he'll sign any anti-abortion bill that reaches his desk. It will then take effect 90 days after the legislature adjourns, which will make this late August.^[33] The law criminalizes the provision of abortion, regardless of the nationality of the provider. --Lambiam 08:41, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That schedule doesn't take into account the various likely court challenges. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:36, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If the law gets struck by a court, that will certainly cause some delay. But a challenge does not by itself impede the law's taking effect. A separate court order is needed to put it on hold. Whether an Oklahoman court would be willing to issue such an order is not clear. To get the issue to be considered by a Federal court, the plaintiffs need to establish sufficient grounds for the thesis that the law violates a constitutional right. --Lambiam 13:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If there's an injunction putting the brakes on a law, then the law has not taken effect. Southern states with their anti-abortion laws are hoping to force the issue to the Supreme Court with the idea that the Trump appointees might sway the majority to nullifying Roe v. Wade. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably worth pointing out that Oklahoma has a trigger law on the books, other bills under consideration including a constitutional amendment and one modeled on SB 8. "In effect" and "struck down" were issues surrounding the Texas act, and a Dobbs ruling is expect before end of term. What any of that means for "in effect" beyond your first straightforward answer i have no damn clue. fiveby(zero) 15:00, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eugene Aram's skull

Is Eugene Aram's skull still at Lynn Museum? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 20:27, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think so. "see the skull of a schoolteacher who was convicted of murder! It was preserved as the Victorians believed in phrenology". Oh, but I think there is more than one museum in King's Lynn, and this one is "Stories of Lynn", located some 300 yards from the one called "Lynn Museum". Card Zero (talk) 21:27, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Stories of Lynn" seems to be located in the town hall and includes the borough archive, the borough treasury, a local history exhibition (with a display of spoons) and the Old Gaol House (home of the preserved skull), and is apparently run by King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council. The Lynn Museum is located in the former Union Baptist Chapel and is run by the Norfolk Museums Service, a quango of Norfolk County Council. [34] Who knew that the museum business was so competetive? Alansplodge (talk) 22:42, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Card Zero:, @Alansplodge:, thank you both. I hope they have a couple of stern-faced men guarding it. DuncanHill (talk) 15:35, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 7

Nobody Mose the trouble I've seen

Are Mose (scribe) and Mose (Ancient Egyptian official) the same person? They were both around during the reign of Ramesses II. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:51, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I read Military of ancient Egypt#Soldiers of Egypt and Scribe#Ancient Egypt and I'm still not sure. I want to say that scribes were basically all inheriting their jobs from their fathers, and weren't royalty, while officers and captains in the military were princes and thus also inherited the right to their positions – but they weren't necessarily princes, and were expected to be well-educated and good at diplomatic speaking, so there's nothing to stop the commander in chief from saying "that scribe is now an officer and his new duty is to hit the Hittites". Card Zero (talk) 15:12, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eine besondere Ehrung für den ägyptischen Soldaten Mose (A special honor for the Egyptian soldier Moses) from Hildesheim. DE has de:Stele des Mose and i don't see any links to de:Mose (19. Dynastie). Probably should not be citing The Exodus Decoded. fiveby(zero) 16:27, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's Kenneth Anderson Kitchen cited in de:Stele des Mose for translation discussing Moses as an Egyptian name: We also have a very many Egyptians who were actully called just "Mose"... [35] and the most famous would be Mose (scribe). Here's i think third scribe Mose, with the author stating: ...the names and titles of Meryre and Mose are commonplace...[36]. fiveby(zero) 17:27, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so it's just a common name. Who knew? Hi, I'm Larry, and this is my scribe Mose and my other scribe Mose. Thanks all. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:29, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yazidis

Is it true that Yazidis will not eat lettuce for religious reasons? What are they like with curly endive? Thanks. 86.188.121.114 (talk) 11:45, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them won't. Others will. See Yazidism#Purity and taboos. Nanonic (talk) 13:13, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But that says cabbage (and the BBC source used there makes no mention of that vegetable). And is it because one of their patriarchs was reputed to have been murdered by using that vegetable? 86.188.121.114 (talk) 14:41, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do you murder somebody with a cabbage? --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:38, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I blame Sauerkraut {although that paper does seem to argue the reverse), it can be fatal. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:52, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps by adopting fruit-based methods? --47.147.118.55 (talk) 22:48, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This portrait of Jean Picard appears pixelated

It kinda resembles a large Minecraft painting. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 13:28, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is a jpeg, a type of digital image that uses Lossy compression, which is to say that when images are compressed, for say scaling, the information used to compress them is "lost"; undoing the compression introduces errors and artifacts not in the original image. What this looks like is that someone took a very small jpeg image of a painting and enlarged it greatly. Jpegs are a type of raster graphic, which is to say the image is stored as a series of individual pixels with data about the color of each pixel. When you blow up a raster graphic larger than it's original size (as appears to have been done here), the pixelation becomes obvious, since now you have a large square cluster of pixels all having the same color as the original image. This kind of thing is less of a problem using lossless compression formats such as PNG graphics, which would still suffer from some pixelation at high magnifications. SVG and other vector graphics formats are much more scalable than raster graphics, but have their own problems when representing realistic images, as they don't efficiently handle the subtle irregularities of real life the way that raster graphics can. --Jayron 32 13:38, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jpegs use the Discrete cosine transform, which involves superimposing a lot of waves so that those can be stored instead of the pixel information.
This is tied to specific-sized blocks of pixels, so yes, it's a raster format, but the Compression artifacts that result reveal the boundaries of those blocks, rather than a case of the jaggies like Jean Picard is suffering from here.
PNG graphics specify individual pixels losslessly, but would suffer from the same problem if you upscaled one using the nearest-neighbor algorithm.
SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics) is indeed scalable, can confirm. Card Zero (talk) 14:18, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the corrections. I was doing my best to generalize from non-specialist knowledge on the differences between raster and vector graphics (both are useful for different reasons) and I appreciate the better details you gave on each format. --Jayron 32 14:20, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I enjoy those rare moments on the ref desk when I don't feel like I'm winging it. :) Card Zero (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When I say "doing my best to generalize from non-specialist knowledge", what I really mean is "winging it". --Jayron 32 14:37, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the original image goes, the image the OP linked is a really shitty crop from File:Colbert Presenting the Members of the Royal Academy of Sciences to Louis XIV in 1667.PNG by Henri Testelin. Picard appears to be 6th from the left along the top row of figures. File:Picard, La Hire, Cassini I.jpg, a better crop, seems to imply that the portly man next to Picard is Philippe de La Hire, and the man in the fantastic wig in front of him is Giovanni Domenico Cassini. Can't confirm any of those, however, or even that Picard is correctly identified. In the OP's image, de la Hire appears to be simply lazily colored over with a uniform brown color.--Jayron 32 14:35, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ackshully if you click "more information", the terrible crop says it comes from File:Testelin,_Henri_-_Colbert_Presenting_the_Members_of_the_Royal_Academy_of_Sciences_to_Louis_XIV_in_1667.jpg, which is lower res (and higher contrast, and a bit more pink). It must have been repaired a lot by somebody working away diligently in Paint (or ACDSee according to the metadata). Poor Jean Picard is being menaced from behind by a wall of cloned wig matter. Card Zero (talk) 14:58, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless, it is still, if I must resort to technical jargon, really shitty. I'll see what I can perhaps dig up for better use in the article in question. --Jayron 32 15:07, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I can't find anything else. There's some mis-labeled engravings of a Johannes Andreas Piccart (this guy), who is a contemporary of our Jean Picard, but is not him. --Jayron 32 15:24, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first file you linked goes up to 6,000+ pixels wide, so a crop from that ought to do fine, except for the difficulty of removing Philippe de La Hire's intrusive face. The GIMP has a healing brush which might do the trick. Edit: I've more or less done this now, but will need to upload to Commons, I hate that part. So complicated. Card Zero (talk) 15:34, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just cropped it from raster copying the above, cropped starting at x:15-y:38 to 168/199 and added a one pixel line in medium gray along the nose using mspaint. It pretty much stands vectorization in the viewer. --Askedonty (talk) 16:24, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded a new version of the file, which is visible if you click the image above and then click the "description page" link. But the versions of the image on this page and on the Jean Picard article haven't updated, and I don't know what to do to get them to update. Oh, ctrl-F5 (hard refresh) was all it needed: my browser was caching the old version, that's all. Card Zero (talk) 16:28, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The new version looks a LOT better. If you refresh your browser cache, it should show up fine for you. It's showing up for me too. As a best practice, you should update the image description page at Commons indicating the original file you cropped the image from. Makes it easier to track provenance. --Jayron 32 16:31, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blargh, I don't think I can do that retrospectively, because it's like trying to edit an edit summary. I put the information in the "caption" field but that seems like the wrong use of the field (whatever it's for, I've never understood), and the link to the file I cropped from doesn't work, it just appears as plain text. Also I can't find the link to the other version of the original painting, now, even though I found that on the wikimedia page somewhere a few minutes ago, and I think I might have overwritten that information. And this is (part of) why I so rarely upload images. Card Zero (talk) 16:45, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think I fixed it. I think you can just edit the page at Commons and put information in the summary section. I updated the source information and the caption. --Jayron 32 17:52, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! In source. My eyes were just slipping over that because it had something already written there in French, so it looked like none of my business. Thank you. Card Zero (talk) 18:18, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I happen to read a bit of French, so it just named the artist and linked the file it was cropped from. I just updated it (in English, because I'm not that confident in my ability to write proper French). --Jayron 32 18:22, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of changing image files, I also once had trouble fixing an image. Particularly, at the Globalization article, there was a map of the Silk Road where Macrobia was typed down in a shoddy/cruddy way (You think I will speak French? I will not speak French! Nein!), so I tried to correct it. Not understanding why my corrected version wasn't going through yet, I impatiently kept trying again a couple of times until I decided to upload a new, separate image file altogether. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 21:44, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Priest having doubts on religion

Would a priest have doubts on Christianity or other religion, like God and organised religion? 86.143.101.46 (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He might. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:36, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Searching wiki articles for “priest doubts” brings up examples, which are mentioned in Corporal of Bolsena and Vincas Mykolaitis-Putinas, among others. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They say that doubt is a necessary part of faith. Any religious leader worthy of the name would have had their "dark night of the soul", maybe many times. Faith and belief are not carved into the stone of the psyche; they are elusive because humans like seeing evidence for stuff rather than being told something is the case and you just have to believe it. The point being that, if there were evidence, there would be no place for faith or belief. Religious faith is supposed to be a struggle; it's not supposed to be easy. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:52, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it supposed to be a struggle? DuncanHill (talk) 16:57, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because faith, by definition, requires one to accept as true, matters for which there is no valid evidence. The source of doubt is the lack of evidence. If I could prove the existence of God using valid methods of gathering and analyzing evidence, that wouldn't be faith. That would be science. The lack of evidence causes doubt, faith is to be certain without the lack of evidence. That conflict between faith and doubt causes struggle, because to be religious is to accept things on faith. QED. --Jayron 32 18:07, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So an objectively true religion would not be, by your definition, religious. And you haven't really addressed why it's supposed to be a struggle. It just seems like playing with words to find new ways of saying "because I say so". Why wouldn't or shouldn't a god make it easy for people to believe in it? DuncanHill (talk) 18:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as an "objectively true" religion. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:21, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be surprised, but this is a popular topic that has numerous sources. Christian atheism is a very real phenomenon. It is estimated that somewhere between 2–30% of ministers and priests are atheists, depending on the sect or denomination. Viriditas (talk) 21:47, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Archbishop of Canterbury admits he has doubts about God. Alansplodge (talk) 21:55, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is also worth noting that, among Christian denominations which have priests as clergy, there are hundreds of thousands of such priests. Given such large numbers of priests, that any one of them may have any particular emotional state at any one time is likely to happen. The OP's question about whether "a priest" may have doubts is so likely to be true for at least a priest among the millions of such priests, that it doesn't bear further proof that one such priest exists. One can safely assume that one does. --Jayron 32 11:47, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas the Apostle seems relevant here. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:13, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the first Father Ted episode, when Father Dougal McGuire (being mistaken as Father Ted Crilley) was being interviewd on TV, he exprssed his doubts on the religious life, like not knowing if God really exists and not beliveing in organised religion. See Father Ted - S01E01 3/3 - 5:39-5:49 86.143.101.46 (talk) 18:35, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Siam 1885 cession

The map of Siamese territorial cessions seems to indicate territory lost in the north in 1885, yet I was unable to find any such record of such a cession existing. The map cited as reference material also indicates territory lost in the area, labeling it as "Shan States" but gives the date as 1893. Furthermore, other citations for the original map show no territorial cession there at all, and I haven't been able to find anything to back up territorial losses in the region to the British. Is this an issue with the maps? Or am I perhaps missing something obvious? Also I tried to link to the image file but the preview just showed the image file itself which was enormous. It is File:Map of Siam (territorial cessions).svg on wikipedia. 104.246.196.199 (talk) 21:52, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's file for you - |thumb added to end makes it small. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 22:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shan States is an article which has the date 1885 in it, in relation to the Third Anglo-Burmese War. It's about parts of Burma, though, and it says the Siamese Shan States were something different, so this looks potentially muddled. Card Zero (talk) 22:45, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the File! and the tip, very helpful. I didd find the info on the Burmese war but that can't really explain the marked loss as you mentioned. 104.246.196.199 (talk) 23:54, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The area looks to be mostly Kengtung, and the 1885 date probably refers to the British, but see Burmese_resistance_movement_1885–1895#The Limbin Confederacy and 1894-5 would be a better date for British control. I'm not sure why that is considered a "Siam 1885 cession". See Winichakul, Thongchai (1997). Siam Mapped. "The Nonbounded Kingdom" p. 74- and "Overlapping Margins" p. 97- with Lying between Burma, Lanna, and Yunnan, Kengtung was a tributary of both the Burmese and Chinese overlords, and sometimes of Siam,... fiveby(zero) 02:56, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 8

Agromassidayu.com

I came across this webpage recently and have been unable to get much information about it. It's quite interesting, is in English with a Russian flavor.

Can anyone please show who and where this website is run by? eng.agromassidayu.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:9060:5A80:7032:8906:342E:85E7 (talk) 05:08, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can't tell who it's run by either (no 'About' page and WHOIS is useless), but I can probably tell you what it is: a content farm. I Googled a few snippets of articles (in English and Russian) and the only results are their own website, so perhaps they're actually writing them (or at least paraphrasing a bit) instead of just copying from somewhere.

As for where it is, it's behind Cloudflare, so it's not clear where the servers are located. (and even IPs wouldn't confirm where the owners are)

Sunmist (talk) 05:23, 8 April 2022 (UTC); edited 05:28, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The website exists in 42 languages; the first label of the three-label web address identifies the language in a three-letter code. If you leave out this label, resulting in agromassidayu.com, you land on a page in Bulgarian. --Lambiam 08:22, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat tellingly, Russian is not one of these 42 languages. I discern a pro-Russian slant in the content. Item: "Is there kleptocracy in Russia? In terms of logic and common sense, all governments in the world can be blamed for kleptocracy."^[37] It is reminiscent of the reaction All Lives Matter to the slogan Black Lives Matter. --Lambiam 08:37, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As to the debate stopper that all governments are kleptocracies, compare also the new commandment to replace all commandments, "All animals are equal, ..." . --Lambiam 12:11, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the argument is the fallacy of binary thinking; that degree doesn't matter, all that matters is existence or non-existence. That all governments, to a degree, contain at least one person in them which is corrupt does not mean that all governments are equally corrupt, and that governments with lower levels of corruption have no means to be critical of governments with much higher and more harmful levels of corruption. --Jayron 32 12:27, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Latinx

Per top of page, we don’t answer request for opinions, and we’ve got a reference now for the existing term and how it is used. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:23, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with Latino/Latina/Latinx is that it refers to the people who speak a derivative of Latin in the Americas. Wouldn't that include the Quebecois? I would like to propose a new term to refer to the inhabitants of Central and South America: American Iberians. What do you all think about this term?

CorporateCommie (talk) 09:33, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 January 8 § In theory, Quebec is part of Latin America. --Lambiam 11:43, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One might think that American Iberians speak a descendant of Iberian in the Americas. Or, based on the meaning of the noun Iberian, that this refers to Americans who are natives of the Iberian Peninsula, like Tiffany Red. Not all countries of Central and South America have a national language that descends from Latin. Finally, Portuguese and Spanish are not the only languages from Iberia that have crossed the ocean to South America; don't forget the large contingent of Basque Argentines. --Lambiam 12:00, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's a problem if you choose to make it a problem. Maybe some others do too, but millions don't. See etymological fallacy. ColinFine (talk) 12:17, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I think the OP is committing the greatest cardinal sin of linguistics, which is the etymological fallacy, which is to say that a word means only what it's historical roots say it should mean. That's not true in any way. Etymology is not usage, and that a word has a root history doesn't mean it can only mean what that history indicates that it should. Yes, languages like French do derive from Latin. That is simultaneously true and irrelevant to understanding what the terms "latino/a/x" actually mean. The only way we can learn what the terms mean is to look at their usage; what group of people are meant by a speaker when they use the term "Latinx" and its related terms. The truth is, Quebecois are not included in that usage. No one uses the term to include the Quebecois. Because they are not included in the minds of speakers when they use the term. It doesn't matter that French is a Latin-derived language. Definition is controlled by usage and by the intent of the speakers using the word, not by history. --Jayron 32 12:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there something wrong with Hispanic? I suppose it doesn't include Brazilians, but that seems like a detail. Also, look at the usage notes at wikt:Latinx#Usage notes, which I would personally summarise as "don't". Actually, which are the other non-Spanish-speaking South American countries? There's French Guiana (French, oddly enough), Suriname (Dutch), and Guyana (English). Card Zero (talk) 13:08, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That other words exist, doesn't mean that this word is wrong. As noted, latinx is not a perfect synonym of Hispanic, and furthermore, the term is widely used. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. --Jayron 32 13:40, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's also Latin (as a noun for a speaker of a Latin language). Seems little used for some reason. Probably Latino/Latina gained more popular use due to being Spanishy words. Card Zero (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification. The reason I asked this question was to find a middle ground between the proponents of Latinx(as it is gender neutral) and the people who find it offensive : https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/politico-poll-40-percent-of-hispanics-find-latinx-offensive/

Also, the term isn't well-known : https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2020-08-11/latinx-pew-poll-latino-hispanic-identity

It guess Latin American is gender neutral and can satisfy both the parties.

CorporateCommie (talk) 15:06, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just realized that American-Iberian would exclude Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana. But Dutch and English is Germanic not Latin.

CorporateCommie (talk) 15:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not entirely sure why the discussion was closed... the question isn't excessively trollish or violating RD standards. The simple answer, and the answer to many similar questions here, is that it depends. Any label on ethnicity, nationality, regionality, race etc is arbitrary and ambiguous. Regional labels aren't necessarily logical. Parts of South America is located to the north of parts of Central America - Barranquilla (where the population is arguably South American) is located to the north of San José, Costa Rica (where the population is arguably Central American). Finland or Cyprus are usually not considered to be part of Eastern Europe, in spite of being to the east of several Eastern European countries. And so forth. As per the term 'Ibero-American', it exists, but is not commonly used to identify people (as it is superfluous to 'Latin American'). On way to get around the issue of whether some other countries like Suriname or Haiti should be included in Latin America or not is to use the term 'LAC' ('Latin America and the Caribbean') - this is similar to 'MENA' (Middle East and North Africa) which avoids the issue of whether Egypt belongs to Middle East (culturally and historically) or North Africa (in terms of Eurocentric geographic concepts). --Soman (talk) 16:31, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Any question that starts "I propose..." is necessarily suspect. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:10, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "Les civilisations de l'Inde".

[1]

@@ Line 321: / Line 321: @@
 [[Thomas the Apostle]] seems relevant here. --[[User:Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Khajidha|contributions]]) 15:13, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
+In the first ''Father Ted'' episode, when Father Dougal McGuire (being mistaken as Father Ted Crilley) was being interviewd on TV, he exprssed his doubts on the religious life, like not knowing if God really exists and not beliveing in organised religion. See [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAgENV_M8Z8 Father Ted - S01E01 3/3 - 5:39-5:49] [[Special:Contributions/86.143.101.46|86.143.101.46]] ([[User talk:86.143.101.46|talk]]) 18:35, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 == Siam 1885 cession ==