Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

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.

Did Darwin say this?

I’ve seen the following quote floating around the Internet attributed to Charles Darwin. Usually it’s either quoted approvingly by racists on sites such as Chimpmania, or else by creationists to attack him.

“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla.”

Given that other racist quotes have been falsely attributed to Darwin in the past by creationists and racists for their respective purposes (one such quote was from Thomas Dixon’s novel, The Clansmen), I’m skeptical the above quote was actually Darwin. But you never know. 2600:1014:B024:12AF:D8C:772B:5474:843E (talk) 23:20, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Darwin, Charles (1871). The Decent of Man (PDF). Vol. 1. London. p. 201.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)—eric 23:37, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See also this section int the Decent of Man article, there is probably more commentary than Why Freud Was Wrong, but that is all that is mentioned in that section.—eric 23:55, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since we're citing sources, perhaps we could cite it correctly. The word is Descent. --76.69.116.4 (talk) 03:54, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Especially as there's nothing decent about racism. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:03, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

spelling is beneath me.—eric 04:07, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then kindly bid your adieux to the human race. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:07, 21 November 2019 (UTC) [reply]

of all my failures, i never imagined spelling would be the one to class me with the savages.—eric 20:36, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, spelling being beneath you means you are above. Non-human, for sure, yet not savage but divine! ---Sluzzelin talk 22:28, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 22

Post-hearings impeachment schedule

Is it known when the House of Representatives approves articles of impeachment and when a trial will be held in the Senate (or when something happens after the hearings)? Impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump currently doesn't seem to mention that. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 09:26, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They've said in the House they want to wrap it up by year's end. There's no indication what, if anything, the Senate will do. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:43, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 13:06, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lenina

On this map from 1812, if zoomed and panned to Voskresensk area near Moscow in the upper part, there's a place seemingly labelled as Lénina (slightly to the right from Voskresensk). A Russian overlay of that part on modern map was inconclusive for me and a quick Russian search for that place (Ленина) shows nothing relevant. Is it indeed Lenina or something else? Brandmeister^talk 15:15, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at some of it. There are three problems. First, that map is not to scale at all. It is very bad. My best guess at finding anything was to follow the Moskva River. Second, many names have changed - some drastically - over the years. So, you have to pick a few places that haven't changed (or changed very little) and use those as points to triangulate. Again, the scale is way off. Third, when a city name stopped being used in one area, it was often used in another area. So, searching a map by town name will likely take you to a completely different location. All I can say is that there are few "Lenina" references left. Most references to Lenin have been destroyed or at least renamed. 135.84.167.41 (talk) 15:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That obviously predates Lenin's birth, so couldn't be named after him. For quicker accessibility I made a crop. Brandmeister^talk 16:44, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Voskresensk on the map isn't that Voskresensk. It's an older name for Istra, Istrinsky District, Moscow Oblast. The "Rojestvino" is still around as Rozhdestveno (ru:Рождествено (село, городской округ Истра)), and "Talitsa" as Talitsy (ru:Талицы (городской округ Истра)). Your "Lenina" seems to be Lenino (ru:Ленино (Московская область)). The Russian Wikipedia article says that this name was given in the 19th century by a landowner who gave the village to his daughter, Yelena, and that the older name had been Lupikha. --Amble (talk) 17:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. Brandmeister^talk 18:39, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Titusville, Ohio?

The article on the recently-deceased Frank Joranko has him born in Titusville, Ohio, which is a red link. The source is a newspaper clipping from a newspaper in Benton Harbor, Michigan. He did go to high school in Ohio, but I suspect that the Titusville where he was born was Titusville, Pennsylvania. Can anyone either attest the existence of a Titusville, Ohio now or around 1931, when he was born (my research hasn't turned up anything), or a confirmation that his place of birth was in Pennsylvania. His published obituaries are quite detailed, but do not mention a place of birth. --Xuxl (talk) 15:56, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GNIS has no such place as Titusville, Ohio. They are very comprehensive, and if it does exist or has ever existed, I would take GNIS as authoritative. --Jayron 32 16:04, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is clearly no such place. The reference used in the Joranko article is a blurb from 1973 about him making a speech in Michigan. It be gone. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:50, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's a scarcity of early information about Joranko on Ancestry.com. The 1940 census is missing, at least under that name. The Ohio ~~death~~ birth index says he was born in Ohio, but no town given. His ancestors came from what is now Ukraine and settled initially in coal mining country in West Virginia before moving to the Cleveland, Ohio area at some point. He was born about 6 months after his parents were married, so maybe they were trying to obscure the past somewhat. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:35, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, that dubious citation was posted 9 years ago,[1] by an editor who's still active, though there's no guarantee he would recall much about an old edit. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:12, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tiltonsville, Ohio?—eric 19:17, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Class of '48, Euclid High School, Euclid, Ohio.—eric 19:51, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Euclid part is well-established. Tiltonsville is theoretically possibly, being not far from West Virginia. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:37, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. The original 1973 clipping is viewable through the link provided in the article's references, and it does mention a birth in Titusville, Ohio. However, it is likely mistaken given the absence of proof of Titusville's existence, now or then. But it doesn't look as if there are enough elements to establish what the correct birthplace is. Xuxl (talk) 21:00, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 23

Can US TV channels refuse the highest bidder solely cause they don't like your candidate?

For a TV commercial slot. What about campaign ads in other countries? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:38, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No idea about other countries, but in the US this is covered by the equal-time rule, which only applies to broadcasters running ads on behalf of candidates. It does not apply to running news or documentaries about a candidate or their campaign, nor does it apply to ads run by people not running for office and also unaffiliated/not-coordinating with someone who is. Basically, "please vote for me" and "please vote for that guy" are treated differently. Broadcasters are singled out because space is limited on public airwaves. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For the UK see Party political broadcast, you can't run political advertising per se on television or radio. See also Campaign advertising. A number of countries ban ads purely to stop those parties with a bigger budget drowning out the others. Nanonic (talk) 05:16, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apo of Atimaha

Bishop Museum Archives, MS 5-S9, Apo of Atimaha, Encouagement aux indigènes Huahine qui vont aux combats, trans. by Reverend Orsmond (September 20, 1849) ms.

I came across this source in Empire of Love: Histories of France and the Pacific, I am try to figure about what is it exactly about and who was Apo of Atimaha. KAVEBEAR (talk) 09:18, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apo, doyen des Raatiras d'Atimaha (ile Moorea)

Cuzent, G. (1872). Voyage aux îles Gambier. p. 130. Doyen, raatira, Atimaha Valley, Moorea.—eric 15:12, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's the wrong location for the valley in geonames, see point #13 on this map.—eric 15:47, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apo seems to have had a ceremonial role; in Annuaire historique universel ou histoire politique pour 1855 p. 300 there is a description of "Apo, doyen des raatiras d'Atimaha" delivering a funerary speech to (presumably) Pōmare IV:

"Hail to you, Pomare Queen of Tahiti! Hail to you in the name of the true God! We come here, we chiefs, judges, mutois (constables) and raatiras (freemen) of the districts, to salute you and to weep with you [for] the death of your son".

(D'oh! I've just realised that this is the same text linked above in Voyage aux îles Gambier, but if your French is even worse than mine, that's what it says - probably!) Alansplodge (talk) 11:10, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the title of the source, "Encouragement aux indigènes Huahine qui vont aux combats", means: "Encouragement to the Huahine indigenous people who go to battle". The text of it doesn't seem to be available online, but it probably refers to the Franco-Tahitian War, during which a force of French marines landed on Huahine but were defeated at the Battle of Maeva (there's an article to write if anyone is bored). The underlying cause of the war was a somewhat un-Godly dispute between Anglophone Protestant missionaries and French Catholics, the latter being supported by their government as a pretext for colonial expansion. This article demonstrates Protestant support for the Huahine locals whom it calls "our afflicted brethren". The same article mentions a "a beautiful letter which she [Queen Pomare] has addressed to her people here" outlining the details of the battle and I wonder if this is could be the text in question? Alansplodge (talk) 15:48, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There may be an extract in this doctoral thesis: google for "Apo, Huahinean Uar Chant"(can't get link to work) page 164 in the PDF, 149 in the text. I am not sure that this is what we are looking for, there is a note for "Orsmond's annotation to Apo, Huahinean War Chant" on p. 150 in the PDF, 135 in the text.—eric 16:07, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Different sources, so possibly not the correct chant. The quoted piece is from Orsmond, J. M. (1816). The Arioi: War in Tahiti. which is a published volume of Ormond's papers. Roussier, from the note connected to Apo was published in "Documents ethnologiques taïtiens...". Revue d'ethnographie et des traditions popularies. 9: 188–206. 1928..—eric 16:23, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The journal is in the HathiTrust catalog[2] so you might have some luck asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request.—eric 16:50, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

fastest growing language

Which languages are considered as language of the future? Some say Chinese Mandarin, some websites say Spanish.

English will always remain one of the most spoken second language. When I search online, I get results of most spoken language for native speakers and spoken as second language.

Europe, Russia, Japan, USA, Canada has low birth rate while Africa and South Asia has higher birth rate. So, it's possible some European language speakers are decreasing every year.

In future which languages are more likely to be used for international relations, business? -- 13:12, 23 November 2019 Gökkusagipiyanisti

The fastest-growing language (percentagewise) is likely to be a relatively small one, not one of the world's major languages... AnonMoos (talk) 15:42, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend the questioner inquire somewhere with experts on the topic, for example users on Language Log. It would help if the questioner told us where they live, where they want to live, and what they want to do. Or call the EU. Does anyone have their phone number? Temerarius (talk) 20:05, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A candidate mentioned in several future-set works of science fiction of the 1960s was Portugese, on the assumption that Brazil's economic and population growth would continue until it became a globally dominant nation. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.217.209.178 (talk) 21:57, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Viagens Interplanetarias... -- AnonMoos (talk) 04:01, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, AnonMoos: I'd forgotten the trope went back as far as the 1940s. I've also seen it alluded to by other writers than L. Sprague de Camp. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.217.209.178 (talk)~

One opinion: "My opinion is that for the next few decades, yes, it [English] will stay as the Lingua Franca for the entire planet, as more people are learning this language every day. China for example is teaching it's people English at a very fast pace to assist in their goal of being the dominant economic power in the world. I do feel that the other two languages mentioned above, Chinese and Spanish, will become increasingly important global languages that in 50 years will be essential for anybody doing international business to know. You won't have to be perfectly fluent in these languages, however having enough of a grasp of them for even basic communication would be a huge benefit to almost anybody". [3]

And another: "In many parts of the world, English is still regarded as a passport to success. So is the future of English at risk? I don't think so, although its global dominance may well diminish over the coming decades". BBC - Can English remain the 'world's favourite' language?. Alansplodge (talk) 12:21, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This report by a nonprofit suggests that the UK's greatest future needs will be for people fluent in Spanish, Arabic, French and Mandarin (in that order), followed by German, Portuguese, Italian, Russian, Turkish and Japanese. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Trump-Ukraine scandal, is what Trump and his associated did a crime?

I understand from the Mueller Report that Trump can't be charged with a crime while in office, but several associates of his were for their role in the Russia scandal. Isn't it the same case here, or did he and associates not break the law regarding Ukraine and quid pro quo?

It would have to be proven in a court of law. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:40, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'm curious if what they "allegedly" did a crime to begin with

Actually, none of Trump’s associates were charged with a crime “due to their role in the Russia scandal”. They were charged with crimes that were unrelated to the Russia scandal (but discovered while investigating it). Subtle, but important difference. Blueboar (talk) 22:02, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's incorrect in at least one case, that of Michael Flynn. --Amble (talk) 22:44, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nope... Flynn was convicted of lying to the FBI over a different issue. Yes it was about him talking to Russians (which is why it came to light during Muller’s investigation), but it had nothing to do with the election meddling accusation. Blueboar (talk) 00:24, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The OP and your response said “the Russia scandal”, not “accused of election meddling.” I think you’re shifting the goalposts here. --Amble (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Even by your new criterion, “nothing to do with the election meddling accusation” is not correct. Flynn’s communications appeared to be undercutting penalties imposed on Russia in response to election meddling. --Amble (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Flynn may also be in violation of the Logan act, though that law has never been effectively enforced. Depending on how random Rudy Giuliani was flailing around, he might also have been in violation, unless all his actions are authorized by Trump. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:16, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

With the caveat that I am native to and live on a different continent: my doubtless imperfect understanding is that while it may or may not be the case (being thus far untested by the SCOTUS) that the POTUS him/her/themself is above the law, that does not apply to others who may carry out illegal acts ordered by the POTUS. The concept of Criminal orders may apply, as might the terms of various officials' Oaths of Office. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.217.209.178 (talk) 17:23, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

With respect to general crimes, you are probably right. But the Logan act criminalizes unauthorized negotiations with foreign powers, and the president can authorize such negotiations. So if he gave Giuliani carte blanche, Giuliani may well be guilty of extortion, bribery, and conspiracy to illegally overthrow the US constitution (and could be prosecuted for that), but he would not be in violation of the Logan act. If, on the other hand, he had a limited mandate, or none at all, and negotiated for the delivery of two pounds of flathead nails on behalf of the US, he would be technically in violation. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 18:09, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree that BlueBoar's exception seems too far. If Flynn's dealing with Russia occurred before he got involved with Trump, or perhaps after he'd fallen out with Trump perhaps it would make sense to consider them separate. But since they occurred while he was involved with Trump, it's difficult to definitely conclude they didn't have something to do with Russia's election interference since ultimately there is a lot we do not know about their interference let alone why Flynn did what he did, even with the Mueller Report (which I have not read) except that there was not sufficient evidence the campaign "coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities". Nil Einne (talk) 10:11, 25 November 2019 (UTC)\[reply]

I should clarify when I said "we" I meant the general public based on the evidence available e.g. the Mueller report, the documents about his conviction etc, although I'm sure even those with intimate details like those in the intelligence agencies still don't know a lot and are only guessing. Anyway to explain things in a different way, let's say person A murders person B. There is strong evidence in the form of video etc. Maybe there is also evidence their motive was jealousy. Person A agrees to plead guilty to the murder but indicates while they will say say how they did it etc, they will not give a motivation or even they will give a motivation that doesn't agree with the evidence available. The prosecution probably after consulting with the family, chooses to accept this, and the defendant allocutes their crime but doesn't mention anything about jealousy. Does this mean it's accurate to say person A was convicted of murder but it had nothing to do with jealousy? I would suggest no. Nil Einne (talk) 11:52, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And looking at the Muller report, the section say

Incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was the Transition Team’s primary conduit for communications with the Russian Ambassador and dealt with Russia on two sensitive matters during the transition period: a United Nations Security Council vote and the Russian government’s reaction to the United States’s imposition of sanctions for Russian interference in the 2016 election. <snipped> Although transition officials at Mara-Lago had some concern about possible Russian reactions to the sanctions, the investigation did not identify evidence that the President-Elect asked Flynn to make any request to Kislyak.

and while I'm sure a bit more has been mentioned in stuff released relating to his conviction, this affirms my view there's a lot we don't know about why he did what he did.

In any case, I agree with Amble. Even if Flynn and anyone who may have asked him to have that conversation didn't have Russia's election interference under consideration, it's weird at a basic level to suggest it was unrelated when what he was asking them to do that he lied about, was not retaliate to sanctions because of the alleged election interference. In other words, maybe their motivation had nothing to do with Russian's election interference, but it was something that was related to the interference.

And in a similar vein, I think we also have to consider Roger Stone#Relations with Wikileaks and Russian hackers before the 2016 United States elections. As I understand it, the US government seems to have concluded the Podesta emails hack was carried out by hackers link to Russia and is therefore part of the Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Wikileaks denies this and individual editors are free to believe what they want, but when talking about this it only makes sense to accept it as true.

Roger Stone has been convicted of "obstruction, making false statements, and witness tampering" in relation to trying to cover up his contacts with Wikileaks about info that according to the US came from Russian hackers. Maybe he genuinely didn't know or have any reason to believe in Russian interference at the time of this contacts, and maybe he genuinely still does not believe Russia was involved. But the fact remains, he tried to cover up something which from the US government's POV was part of the Russian interference. And that was after he was aware that the US government believed in their interference. So he was effectively and knowingly attempting to make it more difficult for them to investigate the interference, even he rejected that view.

Nil Einne (talk) 12:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

POTUS isn't considered to be above the law. There is a Department of Justice policy against indicting a sitting president but that is not mandated by statute afaik. If there is sufficient evidence that the POTUS committed crimes, he or she is supposed to be impeached, removed from office, and then prosecuted, per the DOJ policy. But ever since the Nixon pardon there has been no appetite for anything like that. The Clinton impeachment in the 1990s and the current Trump "inquiry" were/are both mere Kabuki dance. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 05:17, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see that the original question has been answered. Is what Trump and his affiliates are accused of, a crime in US law? Thanks. Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 10:44, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is that we cannot answer this conclusively because no one has yet been brought up on charges (that we are aware of) let alone convicted. There are a bunch of possible crimes which have been mentioned above, which may [4] [5] or may not be already under investigation. But as with a lot of complicated areas of law, it's difficult to reach any reliable conclusions without a conviction. Nil Einne (talk) 12:28, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Impeachment can occur due to "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." The specific issue in this one is bribery (or perhaps extortion would be the better term), and he would be booted from office if convicted. In the unlikely event that happens, then it's up to the legal system to decide what, if anything, to do with him. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:40, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is also obstruction of justice, which would fit under the "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" part of the clause. The Mueller report, AND Mueller in his testimony, refused to clear Trump of the possibility of being charged with that. The responsibility of filing that charge was outside of his purview, but he clearly indicated the evidence did not clear Trump of such a charge. --Jayron 32 12:57, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't disagree, on the last point remember while the above discussion largely concerned the Russian stuff including the Mueller report, the OP's question as I understand it only relates to the Ukraine stuff. Trump could have committed obstruction of justice there, but the Mueller report isn't going to provide much evidence except for how things may operate. Nil Einne (talk) 05:32, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't followed it closely but I haven't heard anyone in a position of responsibility clearly allege that Trump committed a crime ("clear" = phrased like an indictment, more or less). There is perhaps reasonable suspicion that he did, and there is an ~~investigation~~ "inquiry" going on to collect evidence. Some of this evidence seems valid and some seems bogus. Either way it's likely that there will be a Senate trial. If there is a trial, Trump will be acquitted unless something absolutely amazing turns up between now and then.

I think there have been 5 or 6 impeachment proceedings in history that got as far as the current one. Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson were acquitted by the Senate; Nixon resigned from office before a trial got started, and a few others didn't reach trial. In every case, the opposition party supposedly got control of the WH in the next election, so that is probably what the Dems are hoping this time. But, Clinton's impeachment (which was in his 2nd term) actually increased his popularity, and he later said that if he had been allowed to run for a 3rd term, he would have done so. I can't even say Clinton's impeachment helped Bush 43. Gore was a terrible candidate. So, Trump's impeachment may actually help him get re-elected. We'll see. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 21:12, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 24

Identification of place - function

Hi Folks, does anybody know what the Hochsee-Wehrsportverein "Hansa" in Neustadt is? In the 1940's people took courses there. scope_creep^Talk 16:29, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your link is to a disambiguation page. Do you know which of the 22(?) places in Germany of that name is intended? "Hochsee-Wehrsportverein" suggests a German Naval ("High Seas Fleet") sports organisation, whose branch in Neustadt may have been named "Hansa" (see the Hanseatic league), so we may at least be looking for somewhere on the coast! Neustadt, Hamburg might be a candidate, as the port of Hamburg was indeed in the Hanseatic league.

Is this concerning the article on Harro Schulze-Boysen (which indeed itself links to the disambiguation page)? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.217.209.178 (talk) 17:37, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 2.217.209.178, Yip, I found out what it was, by accident. It was a sailing school. You were very close and I think if I didn't find it out by accident, I could have drawn a idea from you. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 17:43, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to find a French source

I am trying to find out the actual title of this source and which issue it is in.

Bulletin de la Société des Études Océaniennes, Issues 200-211. Société des Études Océaniennes. 1977.

Text of the source:

KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:37, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The "Société des Études Océaniennes" society still exists and a visit to their site Société des Études Océaniennes is suggesting that the title of the source is the one given to the Bulletin. In other words there doesn't seem to be compilations from sources other than works directed by or submitted to the society. --Askedonty (talk) 20:59, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The "text" item in the xml is a little bit garbled by pieces of code but at the bottom of the xml you'll find a standard Dublin Core metadata set: Title / Bulletin de la Société des Études Océaniennes numéro 202 - Description / Chefs et notables des Établissements Français de l'Océanie au temps du protectorat : 1842-1850, Raoul Teissier - Source / Société des Études Océaniennes (SEO) -, dated 1978, copyrighted etc. --Askedonty (talk) 07:52, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see the PDF link in the xml[6]? Does that help?—eric 23:06, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. The PDF helps. KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:49, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Similar question, trying to find which 1944 issue of the same source contain this line: "Manaonao tenait le gouvernement, le nom d'Ariipaea était avec lui ; par lui fut dirigé le gouvernement de Punu i eaaite atua, sur Tarahoi."

Bulletin of the Society for Oceanic Studies , Issues 72-89. Société des Études Océaniennes. 1944.

KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:49, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@KAVEBEAR: the best place for such requests is our very own resource exchange, where a dedicated panel of volunteers is waiting to take your call :) ——SN 54129 10:18, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

KAVEBEAR, I did not check the content yet - The extract you're looking for should be in: "Migrations polynésiennes. Etude critique" in issue 82, March 1948 (the Google books date given for the collection book is in fact that of the first bulletin in the book, with the curious result that the huge part of the content comparatively is postdated). --Askedonty (talk) 12:37, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No. 82 p. 422. We are so much more dedicated than those other people.—eric 13:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is great. Thanks. What’s the exact title of this issue and the author? I can’t load the source on pdf. How do you access the xml? KAVEBEAR (talk) 16:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lescure, Rey (1948). "Documents pour l'histoire de Tahiti". Bulletin de la Société des Études Océaniennes. 7 (12): 422. according to the table of contents (i am not sure about citing such things as a journal or not, the site suggests: "Bulletin de la Société des Études Océaniennes numéro 82". Bibliothèque Numérique de l'Université de la Polynésie française. Retrieved 25 November 2019.). It is in a section titled "1 - Voyage de Pomare à Raiatea" with a footnote to the title stating: "this document does not bear a title, is neither dated nor signed, it is written in French." It looks to be some kind of series by the author describing certain documents, and may be reorganized in the collection Askedonty is looking at in books and could explain the title differences. Here's the PDF URL and Omeka XML.—eric 17:04, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing to add to what eric reported. Before the footnote from the same source (p418), approximately translated: these documents were written in 1845 long after the related events and the narrators are not fully reliable (...) We (the SEO, Lescure Rey) organised those various documents into 4 sections: Travel of Pomare's to the Souls le Vent Islands / War against Raiatea / the flag question / The Crowning of King Pomare. Because the sources are considered unreliable R. Lescure then lists as notable dates 1815, 1821, 1824, 1827, 1842. After that footnotes will be commenting on the origin of the report piece after piece of it. --Askedonty (talk) 17:34, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank again. EricR Why did you list "Documents pour l'histoire de Tahiti" as volume 7 and issue 12? I thought it was issue 82 -KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:47, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi KAVEBEAR, you're very welcome, some fun questions. It is Bulletin #82 but seventh year of publication (1948) and twelfth issue for that year. You'll notice that the page numbers start at 411 in the PDF, it's paginated by volume, and Tome VII (No. 12) does appear on the title page. I think google messed up calling the seventh volume "issues 72-89", those are the bulletin numbers collected in that volume, and maybe off by one number, could be a bulletin was split into multiple issues, or some kind of special issue within the year. I get confused by periodicals sometimes, there may be a volume number with no issue number, but a serial bulletin or newsletter number, or no volume number at all.

In this case 7 (12) is correct, but it is probably easier for others to find by using the bulletin number. Maybe "(No. 82)" should go in the "journal" field: Bulletin de la...(No. 82)?—eric 12:26, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think I understand now.KAVEBEAR (talk) 18:25, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea what is the title of this body of work? It is divided into chapters but there is no title for the whole work and no indication of an author.

Bulletin de la Société des Études Océaniennes (1987). "CHAPITRE VIII: AHU'URA FILLE DU ROI MAI III". Bulletin de la Société des Études Océaniennes, Issues 239–240. Papeete: Société des Études Océaniennes: 45–50. OCLC 9510786.

KAVEBEAR (talk) 18:24, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 25

Landslide victory

Our article doesn't really nail a definition. Is there an accepted and specific definition that would apply to UK elections? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:18, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can find, there is no precise definition. It is an imprecise term that falls in the "you know it when you see it" camp. Certainly, 51%-49% would not qualify, and 90%-10% would qualify, but finding an exact threshold for what one needs to cross to claim a "landslide" is not determined by any international standards organization. See here and here for some discussion of the issue. The first one cites a 15% margin-of-victory, which is about 57.5%-42.5% in a two-candidate race. The second one contains a post in a forum that claims 70% as the threshold, but does not explain where that number came from. --Jayron 32 15:22, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If used correctly, a landslide grows over time. It might start as a rock moving along, which picks up momentum and mass, then more rocks and dirt join in, more momemtum and mass, and so on. So, a landslide victory should begin with a sign that there is a victory. Then, over time, the victory becomes greater and more obvious. Therefore, it is impossible to have a landslide victory if the results aren't known over time. It can be a lopsided victory in that case. But, it all has to do with using the analogy correctly and correct use of language isn't very important. 135.84.167.41 (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for that claim, 135? It sounds like the etymological fallacy to me. --ColinFine (talk) 17:21, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is an analogy, not etymological, because both landslides and victories exist in modern language without a change in meaning. A "landslide victory" is an analogy of a victory that is like a landslide. 135.84.167.41 (talk) 17:36, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's etymological; you're applying the rules for one (the geologic) to the other (the other) based on the shared etymology. Matt Deres (talk) 18:11, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A majority of 100 of the UK's 650 seats would be 57% for the winners. LongHairedFop (talk) 18:43, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are you concerned about Swing (politics) being given so much prominence? OED is just An overwhelming majority of votes for one party or candidate in an election.—eric 16:01, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Liberal Landslide' probably supports that: swing as opposed to vote count.—eric 16:10, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See also realigning election. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 21:38, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Resources on Soviet law

I'm working on the territorial evolution of the Soviet Union, but I'm running short on places to search for laws that would include things like border changes. I was pointed to www.libussr.ru which has been a very useful resource, but it doesn't have all the laws. For example, one I'm searching for is "on the transfer of part of the territory of the Komsomolsk District of the Kostanay Region of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic to the Troitskiy District of the Chelyabinsk Region of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and the partial change of the border between the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic and the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic" of 6 December 1965, which apparently was included in the Bulletin of the USSR Supreme Council (1965), no. 48, Article 69. Unfortunately, this law does not appear to be available online, even on libussr.ru. I found some issues of said bulletin (Vedomosti Verkhovnogo Soveta SSSR) available at a vaguely local library, but it appears to just be from 1991; I don't know if that would include previous years but I doubt it.

Does anyone know of a more comprehensive source of Soviet law, either online or offline, available in the United States? --Golbez (talk) 16:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From Walker, G. (1982). Official publications of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe: 1945-1980 : a select annotated bibliography., Vsesoi︠u︡znai︠a︡ knizhnai︠a︡ palata (1939), Bibliografii︠a︡ sovetskoĭ bibliografii "A systematized bibliography of bibliographies of over 30 items published in the USSR, separately or in books and journals. Includes bibliographies of official documents; particularly useful for tracing bibliographies in specialist areas. Sovetskoe zakonodatelʹstvo: Puti perestroĭki, 1989 {{citation}}: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors= (help), are the two major bibliographies listed for which i see digital copies. At least one step removed from what you are asking but might be a start.—eric 19:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, an official periodical gazetteer also: Soviet Union, SSSR: administrativno-territorial'noe delenie soiuznykh respublik: Na 1 aprelia [year] goda..—eric 19:58, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am assuming, maybe wrongly, that you have some kind of educational access.—eric 20:07, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are digital copies of Vedomosti Verkhovnogo Soveta SSSR for 1991 and other years, someone at WP:RX could probably help.—eric 20:54, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Artist on La Coquille

Trying to find information on an artist on the expedition of Louis Isidore Duperrey on the La Coquille. His name is written as Jules-Louis Lejeune[7], L F Lejeune[8], and Louis-François Lejeune[9]. Is he the same person was Louis-François Lejeune (which we have an article of) since they have the same birthdate or is it a mistake by NINETEENTH CENTURY NEW ZEALAND ARTISTS: A GUIDE & HANDBOOK[10]. Which is his actual name? Why the discrepancy between the inclusion and placement of François and Jules in his name. KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

M. Lejeune nephew of M. le général Lejeune [11]?—eric 01:06, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

also "Jules-Louis Le Jeune, peintre, est le seul civil à bord, privilège qu'il doit certainement au fait qu'il est le neveu du général Louis-François Le Jeune, baron de l'Empire." fr:Louis Isidore Duperrey.—eric 01:19, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Translation: "Jules-Louis Le Jeune, a painter, is the only civilian on the ship, a privilege certainly due to the fact that he is the nephew of General Louis-François Le Jeune, a baron d'Empire." 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:23, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is his lifespan then? Because the New Zealand source uses the birth and death year of his uncle. KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:13, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

bible stories (Copyrighted? by 7th day Adventist Arthur Maxwell) vs Watchtower INC "my book with bible stories"

Please read the restrictions above for use of this desk: "We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate." --Jayron 32 12:55, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hi there, I could compare today the published books of Arthur Maxwell and the book of the shareholder company (I think their copyright is hold by I.B.S.A. international bible student association ?) which is published in yellow, later republished in a blue cover, called "my book with bible stories".

There is really no doubt for me, that the organisation Watchtower has stolen because many pictures have been recovered 1:1, other ones just have some significant marks reprinted (not repainted!) in a new picture and also the full layout and everything else what can be copied, has been copied or let me just say it: STOLEN.
As much as I have found out, the 7th day adventist never suit the Watchtower for stealing their pictures of their book, published by Arthur Maxwell and I am wondering why.
Did they bought the pictures and were allowed to remake it or did the 7th day Adventist just having a good deep sleep and haven't discovered yet that their copyrighted books are abused by another religious cult and foreign printing house? even if there would be no copyright, the adventist must have any right to suit because their "product" is used by another religious cult unless they aren't associated. --46.167.62.33 (talk) 03:01, 25 November 2019 (UTC) This is really boring seeing over and over the question deleted just with the notice "not here", really boring, I am in a literature question area and cant ask what is this?[reply]

Why are you promoting this conspiracy theory? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:12, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

there is no conspiracy I want to know why one religion has never lawsuit the other one for using their pictures and abusing their copyright.

Why don't you ask them directly? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:25, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yet again, not helpful Bugs. Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 09:44, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand the question correctly, you are asking the Reference Desk why a particular organisation has not sued another organisation. It says at the top of the page "We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate." --ColinFine (talk) 12:11, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 26

Treaty between Tahiti and the United States

Trying to find a detailed list of source of the events surrounding the signing of this treaty between Tahiti's king Pomare III and Thomas ap Catesby Jones. KAVEBEAR (talk) 11:27, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Am finding only general, not detailed references. Does anyone know how to find if the ship's log is available? Failing that, here are the general refs:

Annual Report of the Secretary of the Navy, Showing the Condition of the Navy in the Year 1826 gives some info about the context of ap Catesby Jones’s presence on the island: The Peacock is under orders to proceed in execution of that part of your instructions directing me to go with this ship, or dispatch one of the vessels under my command, to the Sandwich and other islands in the Pacific ocean, for the protection of our commerce. Captain Jones is directed to run down the coast as far as Paita, for the purpose of laying in stock and other articles for his crew, which are absolutely necessary, and cannot be purchased here. From Paita he will proceed direct to the Marquesas, and remain there as long as in his judgment is necessary; and from the Marquesas he is directed to visit Otaheite and such other of the Society Islands as to him may appear necessary in furtherance of the object of his cruise; he is then to visit the Sandwich Islands, and after remaining there as long as may be necessary to accomplish the object of his visit, he is to use his discretion as to going to the coasts of California and Mexico. Should he arrive at the Sandwich Islands in time to visit the coasts of California and Mexico before the term of service of his crew shall have expired, and his ship in every other way in a condition to perform the cruise, he is ordered to do so; but should there be any uneasiness among his crew on account of their time being out, or any other circumstance that, in his opinion, the good of the service requires it, he is to return to this port from the Sandwich Islands, touching in at the ports to the northward, on the coast of Peru, to give protection to our ships that are daily leaving here for ports to the northward.
Also mentioned in a footnote in American Indian Law Review Vol 14 No 1. Captain Jones had signed a similar agreement with Chief PomareII of Raiatea and Tahaa, Tahiti, on September 6, 1826, on the same voyage. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:34, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

:( Per [12], the Peacock's log has not yet been scanned.70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:58, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If there is anybody still searching, I have found three sources that I added to Teriitaria II#Regent of Tahiti but each of them only gives passing references. Let me know if anything is found. KAVEBEAR (talk) 01:01, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 27

Gilbert Henri Cuzent

Gilbert Henri Cuzent, a French naval physician writing around 1860, noted: "Terii-Taria, vieille reine de Huahine qui, restée sans postérité, a été détrônée il n'y a pas encore longtemps pour faire place à un de ses neveux." or "Terii-Taria, old queen of Huahine who, left without posterity, was dethroned not long ago to make room for one of her nephews." (page 45)

Cuzent, Gilbert (1860). Îles de la société Tahiti: considérations géologiques, météorologiques et botaniques sur l'île. État moral actuel des Tahitiens, traits caractéristiques de leurs moeurs, végétaux susceptibles de donner des produits utiles au commerce et a l'industrie, et de procurer des frets de retour aux navires, cultures et productions horticoles, catalogue de la flore de Tahiti, dictionnaire Tahitien. Rochefort: Impr. Thèze. OCLC 13494527.

Trying to make sense of what "not long ago" means. What time period was Cuzent on Tahiti? KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:55, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Teriitaria_II#Deposition says things are messy to understand Gem fr (talk) 21:53, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing to my recent edits. But I’m asking when Cuzent would have been writing about. It would be before 1860 when his book is published in France and after 1852 or 1854. KAVEBEAR (talk) 22:22, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1852 to 1863 per this, which outlines his career: Élève en 1839, pharmacien de 3ème classe en 1841, il est embarqué sur la corvette de charge la Caravane en 1845-1846 et d’octobre 1850 à octobre 1851. Pharmacien de 2ème classe en 1852, il est affecté à Tahiti et se révèle comme un excellent botaniste. Affecté à Pointe-à Pitre de 1863 à 1866, comme chef du service pharmaceutique, il participe activement à la lutte contre l’épidémie de choléra qui sévit à la Guadeloupe. Il quitte l’activité en mai 1867. Translation: Joining the service in 1839, he was promoted to third-class pharmacist in 1841. He sailed on the corvette de charge Caravan from 1845 to 1846 and from October 1850 to October 1851. On promotion to second-class pharmacist in 1852, he was posted to Tahiti where he proved himself to be an excellent botanist. Posted to Pointe-à-Pitre from 1863 to 1866, as head of the pharmaceutical department, he took an active part in the fight against the cholera epidemic in Guadeloupe. He left the service in May 1867. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 22:54, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 28

What evolutionary mechanism caused us to lose our fur?

What evolutionary mechanism caused us to lose our fur? The wearing of clothes would and does negate the need for full body fur, yet primitive peoples in Africa did not wear clothes over much of their bodies. Another suggestion raised when discussing this with friends was that ancient man would run-down its prey and fur got in the way of our sweating, but this argument was countered by citing wolves and painted dogs which too run down their prey for hours on end but still have fur. Thanks. Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 08:52, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a combination of trade-offs. There are some suggestions at Body_hair#Evolution_of_less_body_hair.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:45, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great link. Thank you. Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 13:22, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There have been several overall less-accepted theories which have received both strident support and strident opposition, most notably the Aquatic ape hypothesis... AnonMoos (talk) 13:52, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not mentioned in the article, but somewhere I've seen the "pointy nose" question [on Science ref desk] as part of the hypothesis - that it made swimming easier by shielding the nose from water. Of course, both the pointy nose and relatively hairless bodies could have come before swimming, as opposed to them being an adaptation to swimming. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:45, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have thought this was a question for the science noticeboard. And I personally think persistence hunting or getting rid of parasites are far better reasons than the aquatic ape hypothesis, which really is lacking much support overall. We wouldn't be able to get rid of heat anywhere near as well as dogs otherwise unless we developed big lolling tongues like them for panting. Dmcq (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Worth mentionning that humans lost fur through losing length and thickness of hairs, not number of hairs [13], and ^{[citation needed]} (I auto refnec myself, I remember being told or having read this, but cannot source it) (many young mammals are born lacking fur, it grows later) Gem fr (talk) 19:28, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, while we think of fur as some sort of coat (worth getting rid of, in hot climate), it may have happened for entirely different reason. Evolution is somewhat more messy than "it brings some advantage, so it happens". Most of the time, it will more like "it brings some advantage in domain A, so it happens, but it also has side effect in domains B, C, D, some even more massive and noticeable, then the specie change ways in domain D to fit its new physiology, and we imagine things the other way round (ie, as if it adapted its physiology to its ways domain D)". Most mammals HAVE fur, even in very hot desert, even in marine mammals, even moles. Doesn't seem fur is such an hindrance it will be selected against, so, the guess is, it was lost (or, rather, not grown, as young mammals often lack it at birth) as a side effect of something else. Gem fr (talk) 20:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's simply sexual selection since so many females strongly prefer smooth, silky skin. On the other hand Gorillas are among the closest species to humans, yet all grownup male Gorillas develop into Silverbacks in their adulthood. --Kharon (talk) 02:40, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Galitzine Report

The Galitzine report was referred to in Alan Yentob’s BBC1 tv documentary ‘the Man Who Knew Too Much’ on Boris Pahor 106 year old survivor Natzweiler Prison camp.

Does anyone know about the report and why it was not believed? It was quoted from a number of times by Alan Yentob and appeared to have been type written by, I assume, Galitzine. I understood he had been one of the soldiers/officers who had liberated the camp.

I looked on Wikipedia and couldn’t find an entry. I wanted to request a page be made on this subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenstone911 (talk • contribs) 13:17, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One possible location for his writings is in the Rutland County Museum. Per this, he donated his papers to them after becoming an involved member of the community in later life. The only Wikipedia mention of him so far appears to be a line in the article House of Golitsyn, which mentions Prince Yuri Golitsyn and is sourced to a blogpost on the website of a small UK/Germany publishing company that focuses on the Holocaust, and that spells his name Yurka Galitzine. That blogpost says his diary is in the collection of the Imperial War Museum in London but is silent on the whereabouts of his reports. Greenstone911, if you find enough info in reliable sources, you can contribute an article yourself. See Help:Your first article to get started! 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:23, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Imperial War Museum: "a file of reports made by him as part of No.1 War Crimes Investigation Team (48pp) in particular relating to the Struthof-Natzweiler concentration camp, Alsace (1944 - 1946) with accompanying photographs (45 items)"[14] not available online.—eric 16:48, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some in Charlesworth, Lorie (2006). "2 SAS Regiment, War Crimes Investigations, and British Intelligence: Intelligence Officials and the Natzweiler Trial". Journal of Intelligence History. 6 (2): 13–60. Footnote gives this URL for a portion of the report. Cites Kemp, Anthony (1988). The Secret Hunters..—eric 17:13, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the full report from the Eisenhower Library.—eric 17:24, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well done!70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:28, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks. There's more in Lewis, D. (2015). The Nazi hunters. (there's at least one full copy online but i'm not going to link to it). Also looking for "Four British girls burned alive – one German to die. Girl fought at oven door". Sunday Express. 2 June 1946. penned anonymously by Galitzine after the trial. Greenstone911 are we looking for "SHAEF took no action on the report" from Charlesworth, or the outcome of the trial? Not much detail in Natzweiler-Struthof for either.—eric 18:53, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some more about Galitzine and Natzweiler at A Life In Secrets: Vera Atkins and the Lost Agents of SOE by Sarah Helm (p. 180?). Alansplodge (talk) 20:51, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 29