Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:56, 7 May 2023

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/H

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

April 30

Birth rate of developed countries and poor countries

I always though people in developed countries have more money. I have seen that women in poor countries have more children that Europe, USA, Japan. Most parents in those developed countries struggle to raise two kids also. While many Sub Saharan rural women have 10 kids. How are poor people able to feed so many kids, while middle class American compain of rising costs? Some Italians are not having kids as they don't have money to feed extra family memeber.

In 1985, Niger had birth rate of 7.93 child per woman, Chad had birth rate of 7.04 child per woman. 1962, Zimbabwe had birth rate 7.25.

I checked Europe, USA never had such birth rate above 7 per women in past 200 years. Maximum 4.6 for European women 150 years ago. In twentieth century, no White country had birth rate above 5. Still, Europe has more population density than Africa.

Why people in rich countries say raising kids is costly, but people in poor countries have no problem raising many kids? CofeeGhana (talk) 06:50, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The cost of living is much higher in rich countries than in poor countries, so it costs much more money to raise kids in rich countries, but parents there are generally rich enough to do so. In poor countries, it costs much less to raise each kid, although having fewer kids would mean more money available for raising each.

BUT, there is another more important factor. In most rich countries, people usually receive unemployment benefits if they cannot find work and other benefits if they are ill or disabled; they can often afford to save up money for their old age; they may earn occupational pensions from their employers, and they usually receive government-run old age pensions. By contrast, in poor countries some or all of these are unavailable, and unemployed, sick and old people are instead supported by their relatives, including their children. Because also infant and child mortality is higher in poor countries, parents have to have more children in order that enough of them live to adulthood to support those parents when old.

This can cause problems in countries where health standards are rapidly improving, because people continue to have many children out of cultural habits, resulting in a surplus population of young adults who cannot find work. This is called the Demographic trap, and is an important underlying reason behind, for example, recent unrest in various North African and Middle Eastern countries. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.213.18.208 (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's more than just cost of living -- in the conditions of many traditional agricultural societies, children were basically economic assets after about the age of 10, while in more economically-advanced societies, there's usually very little direct economic return for the time, effort, and expenses of child-rearing. In any case, the main article is demographic transition. -- AnonMoos (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CofeeGhana Don't be mislead by statistics. The birth rates you are quoting are averages and include couples who have difficulty conceiving, or the woman has difficulty carrying the pregnancy to term. A look at many family trees will show families of 0, 1, or 2 children alongside those of ten or a dozen. The next point where statistics can easily mislead is to equate live births to successful rearing, the rate of infant mortality has varied a lot over history. For many and complex reasons the "White countries" (your term) had safer drinking water, paved streets and sewage/rubbish removal before other countires. These were the major changes in public health which lead to northwest Europe entering stage 2 of the demographic transition. If I remember correctly (from studying this at school 50 years ago) the UK entered stage 3 roughly at the start of WWI. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:14, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The cost to raise a child varies by what parents deem necessary to provide for a child. In some parts of the world a $1000USD stroller is a reasonable need, in others a stroller is not necessary. Some parents plan to spend over $100,000 on education for their children while most parents across the globe do not and both groups see their choice as reasonable for properly raising a child. Of 19 (talk) 21:46, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another factor is time. In western countries, you need a lot of education to have any chance at a job. Then you have to find a job, then another job that actually pays well enough to afford cheap housing. In some poor countries you may be able to survive on €50 per month, but in western Europe the poorest quality apartment will already cost you €500 per month. Then you have to find a mate (not trivial in a society where you don't even know the name of your neighbour and only communicate with computers; most people still meet their colleagues, but many jobs have a strong gender bias, so that doesn't help), then a home that's big enough to have children. It's career first, then children. In my country, the average age of a woman when she has her first child is about 30. Starting at that age, 3 children is about the limit. PiusImpavidus (talk) 08:54, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One aspect not mentioned is the wide and easy availability of contraception, and of the very idea of family planning. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 10:56, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The thing the OP notes is called the Demographic economic paradox. That links to an article where you can read more about the phenomenon. --Jayron 32 11:53, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 1

Weh Antiok Khusrau

The article spite house says: In 541, after the conquest of Antioch, Sassan Emperor Khosrau I built a new city near Ctesiphon for the 30,000 inhabitants he captured, he modelled this city after the original Antioch and was said to have forced the inhabitants to live in their old homes/old workplaces. There’s no source. Where can I read more about this? Amisom (talk) 20:46, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Our Ctesiphon#Sasanian period article has a mysterious reference, "Dingas, Winter 2007, 109" which isn't listed in the Bibliography section.

The History of Ancient Iran p. 327 has a brief mention.

A less reliable source is this blog. If this is correct, it seems that the spite was against the Byzantine emperor rather than the Antiochians, who apparently did rather well out of the deal.

Hopefully another editor can do better. Alansplodge (talk) 21:49, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Dingas, Winter reference is to Dignas, Beate; Winter, Engelbert (2007). Rome and Persia in Late Antiquity. Cambridge University Press. p. 109. Following it up, I find they tell us that "Not far from the Sasanian capital Ktēsiphōn he [Xusrō] built a new city that was modelled upon the conquered city; he named the new foundation Veh-Antiok-Xusrō (='Xusrō made this city better than Antioch') and settled Antioch's deported population here." --Antiquary (talk) 11:22, 2 May 2023 (UTC) And I've added that ref in full to the Spite house and Ctesiphon articles. --Antiquary (talk) 11:32, 2 May 2023 (UTC) Ah yes, I now see the IP below was pointing to that ref. --Antiquary (talk) 11:53, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See also: Weh Antiok Khosrow (and sources therein). 136.56.52.157 (talk) 05:38, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That article doesn’t repeat the claim though. Amisom (talk) 06:09, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not directly, but some of it can be implied from the name meaning "better than Antioch, Khosrow built this" and prisoners-of-war from the cities of Sura, Beroea, Antioch, Apamea, Callinicum, and Batnai in Osrhoene were deported to this new city. Perhaps source(s) can provide more details. 136.56.52.157 (talk) 13:00, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Countries that recognized the old Republic of China

Is there an RS with a full list of countries that diplomatically recognized the 1912-1949 Republic of China? Republic_of_China_(1912-1949)#Foreign_relations mentions some, saying there were 59 countries, but without a reference, History of foreign relations of China appears useless in that regard and elsewhere I had a difficulty with finding (possibly there are Taiwanese sources too, but I don't speak Chinese). Thanks. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 23:02, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Uff, I difficult to find a single source with a full listing. I think we have to narrow the question somewhat, are we speaking about cumulative for the entire period 1912-1949 or do we speak about a number of countries at a certain juncture (say 1949)? Considering 1912-1949 spans both WWI and WWII the list of countries available would differ greatly. --Soman (talk) 01:10, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] (pp. 415-416) has a list of Westeners in Nanjing 1937-1938, it mentions American Embassy, French Embassy, Dutch Legation, Italian Embassy, British Embassy, German Embassy. Page 351 mentions a Belgian Embassy in Nanjing. Page 88 mentions Japanese Embassy in Shanghai. Page 338 mentions that a house on 4, Chibi Road had been rented to the Mexican Embassy. Page 104 mentions diplomatic relations between China and Germany were suspended in 1942. Page 328 mentions a "Swedish envoy" (to China? can't say for sure due to snippet view). Page 365 mentions that China had a legation in Mexico in 1917, and an embassy in Portugal in 1926. And so forth. --Soman (talk) 01:31, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Swedish envoy was Johan Hugo Beck-Friis, Swedish Minister to China.^[2] --Lambiam 16:58, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recognitions might have been highest in the Nanjing decade (after the Northern Expedition and before the Japanese invasion of China). Of course, there were a lot fewer independent nations in the world than there are today... AnonMoos (talk) 02:53, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of thoughts - did the League of Nations require mutual recognition of members? and presumably recognition by the United Kingdom would imply recognition by the Dominions? DuncanHill (talk) 17:40, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In 1920, The Republic of China (hereafter, “China”) was one of 42 founding members of the League of Nations, which over time had a total of 63 member states; it is highly unlikely that any one member would not recognize another. However, Foreign Minister Wellington Koo refused to sign the Treaty of Versailles because the document handed German concessions in China to Japan, rather than return them to China. 34 nations were party to those peace talks. China also was one of the 50 founding members of the United Nations. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 20:33, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We also have states that could have had relations/recognition with China but that were finished by 1920. The Ottoman Empire opened an embassy in China 1904, but I don't know how they reacted to the foundation of the republic. --Soman (talk) 12:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2

Where is "Yew Court" in Trinity College, Cambridge?

http://gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/the-private-dining-room-at-yew-court-trinity-college-news-photo/462700316 , http://gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/the-interior-of-prince-charles-room-at-yew-court-trinity-news-photo/462700372 and http://dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-12027449/Photo-taken-King-Charles-University-Cambridge-1967-released-time.html have photographs captioned "Yew Court" at Trinity College, Cambridge.

Trinity College, Cambridge does not list a "Yew Court". Is it a misspelling of "New Court", and if not, should it be added to the article? Thanks, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 06:31, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Charles stayed in the New Court. DuncanHill (talk) 06:49, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My guess it that it was a typo on the source material, that has been carried through on those few pictures. There's no reference to Yew Court anywhere in any information on Cambridge, excepting that specific yew trees are occasionally mentioned. I'm pretty certain, as with the above speculation, that this is supposed to be New Court. Someone mislabeled (or wrote with sloppy handwriting) back in the 1960s, and those mistakes were carried through. --Jayron 32 18:20, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanations, @DuncanHill and @Jayron32. Cheers, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 01:56, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A book called 'Seera'

According to our article on Joseph Wolff he wrote that the Arabs of Yemen are in possession of a book called 'Seera,' which gives notice of the coming of Christ and His reign in glory, and they expect great events to take place in the year 1840. Do we know anything more about the book called Seera? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 15:16, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on prophetic biography which tells us that Sīrah is the generic name for such biographies of the Prophet Muhammad. Wolff has perhaps abbreviated the title of this particular example too much to make it easy to identify. --Antiquary (talk) 15:38, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Having now had the opportunity of reading the source given in our article, Wolff specifically says it is the Arabs of Hodeyda, and he says the information came from "Muhamed Johar, late Governor of Hodeydah, a gentleman very learned in the Arabic literature". Perhaps this further detail will help someone narrow things down. DuncanHill (talk) 16:03, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More context (but still not the book name, sorry) in Chapter 3 of The Jews of Yemen in the Nineteenth Century: A Portrait of a Messianic Community By B. Z. Eraqi Klorman. Mostly about a Faqih Sa'id who claimed to fulfil this prophecy - unfortunately such a common name is also hard to search. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 3

Did Gandhi observe a strict vow of silence every Monday?

If so, why isn't this in the article Mahatma Gandhi? Being 1/7 of his life, it seems very significant if true. —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 04:45, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. --136.56.52.157 (talk) 07:11, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he just didn't like of Mondays. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:57, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reason it isn't in the article is because Wikipedia is a work in progress. When you find that a Wikipedia article is lacking some necessary information, vanishingly close to 100% of the time, it's because no one thought to add it yet. That person can be you. --Jayron 32 11:13, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, this sounds like at best an oversimplification to me. Gandhi studied law and became a barrister in London, a job hardly compatible with silent Mondays. He then went to South Africa for over 20 years. I suspect this vow was made much later, when he was back in India. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:50, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He doesn’t mention it in An autobiography: The story of my experiments with truth, published in 1927, but he was observing it by 1936 “It was a Monday, his weekly day of silence.” 70.67.193.176 (talk) 18:12, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to the diary of Manu Gandhi, the practice of Monday as a day of silence began on Monday 17 January 1921.^[3] --Lambiam 20:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not in our article on Gandhi, but it is mentioned in Vow of silence. --Lambiam 20:16, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through Gandhi: The Years That Changed the World, Guha talks about:
- Gandhi adopting Monday as the day of silence sometime before 1926 (By now [September 1926], Gandhi had also decided to observe a weekly day of silence. Every Monday, he would not speak at all, communicating through signs or, if necessary, through writing notes on chits of paper.)
- There are continuing mentions of Gandhi continuing the practice during the Salt March (The next day [17th March 1930] was Monday, Gandhi’s designated day of silence, and also now of rest.).
- And in 1934 (Harrison read the article on a Monday, the Mahatma’s day of silence. She marked the passages praising and promoting Gandhi, and handed it over to him. He read it through, twice, asked for a pencil and piece of paper, on which he wrote: ‘Do you know of a Dreamer who won attention by “Adventitious Aid”?’ Asked by Agatha Harrison if he wished to comment further, he shook his head, with (as she recalled) ‘an amused smile’.)
- Sometime in 1947 he shifted the day of silence to Sunday (For many years now, Gandhi had observed his weekly day of silence on Monday. This was now [Feb 1947] changed to Sunday, as that was the day the weekly bazaar was held in this part of eastern Bengal. Gandhi adjusted his schedule to the local rhythms, staying silent on the day when the villagers had to buy or sell their wares, while holding prayer meetings on Monday and through the rest of the week.)
- But it was back to Mondays by the period of his assassination (Monday the 19th [January 1948] was a day of silence for Gandhi. He spent it attending to his correspondence and writing articles for Harijan.)

Abecedare (talk) 20:51, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The sum of all human knowledge before 300 AD?

I have recently started the article Ancient text corpora, which is intended to describe and quantify all known writing prior to 300 AD. It was built mostly using the estimates of German scholar Carsten Peust. Peust stated that he didn’t know enough about South Asian or East Asian corpora, so he left them out. I would like to make the article comprehensive, so it gives a full picture of all the ancient knowledge passed down to us.

Would anyone be willing to help find secondary sources which could fill the gaps of estimating the word-count of the East Asian and South Asian ancient corpuses? I have been looking but it isn’t easy to find.

Onceinawhile (talk) 19:31, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Onceinawhile That's an ambitious project! I happen to live in Seoul but don't know if I can help. I might try the National Library here. BorgQueen (talk) 20:02, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BorgQueen, it certainly is. I figure it is a topic of wide interest, particularly to us wikipedians. I previously believed the topic was too difficult, but Peust's article changed that, and cross-referencing with our pre-existing List of languages by first written account, we have already covered the significant majority of ancient languages.

Part of the reason for that is that the logogram-based ancient languages, Egyptian and Chinese, are counted as single languages, as the ancient spoken dialects can not be known. Old Korean is a good example of that.

Anything you can find to help would be greatly appreciated. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:50, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In that article there appears to be a considerable confusion between the notions of script and language. Egyptian is not a script but a language; Demotic is not a language but a script. --Lambiam 20:30, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I had noticed that but hadn't got round to fixing it. I have fixed it now. Thanks for the prompt. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:36, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Care needs to be taken in counting "words," which is a European notion of writing. Chinese characters, for example, are more akin to syllables than words, and works are sometimes refereed to by the total number of characters (e.g., "a 6,000 character essay"). DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 20:37, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Peust has been careful on that in his scholarly article, for example with Egyptian, writing: "Daraus ergibt sich, dass die Edfu-Inschriften insgesamt annähernd 1,2 Millionen Hieroglyphen umfassen. Da in den Edfu-Texten ein Wort im Mittel mit etwa 2,1 Hieroglyphen geschrieben wird (bei einer Wortsegmentierung ent sprechend der im Wb zugrundegelegten, Suffixpronomina u.a. nicht als eigene Wörter gezählt), kann man festhalten, dass die Texte zwischen fünf und sechshunderttausend Wortformen umfassen." (As a result, the Edfu inscriptions total approximately 1.2 million hieroglyphs. Since a word in the Edfu texts is written with an average of around 2.1 hieroglyphs (in a word segmentation according to the Wb basis, suffix pronouns etc. are not counted as separate words), one can state that the texts contain between five and six hundred thousand word forms.) Onceinawhile (talk) 20:59, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was drawn here by the hubris shown in the use of the word "all" in the title of the section. Then I saw it was perhaps ONLY about knowledge recorded in written words or texts. Obviously some well evolved and well structured human societies had plenty of knowledge before 300 AD without having written language. Is such knowledge outside the scope of this discussion? HiLo48 (talk) 23:54, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @HiLo48: isn’t that roughly consistent with how we use the phrase in WP:OBJECTIVE? We don’t use this wording in the article by the way. Onceinawhile (talk) 06:24, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a parallel, because we cannot get direct sources for knowledge that was not written down, but there are now written interpretations of at least some of that knowledge. HiLo48 (talk) 07:15, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neolithic peoples knew how to make stone tools, for example. That's knowledge clearly, but it isn't written down anywhere. --Jayron 32 11:55, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many cavemen would have kept that knowledge to themselves – a trade secret.

Even today trade secrets are often not written down, and certainly will never find their way to wikipedia.

Onceinawhile (talk) 12:42, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

'Cavemen' had trade secrets? I'd like to see a source for that... AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tongue-in-cheek or not, Harvard Business School would like to have a word: "Trade Secrets: Intellectual Piracy and the Origins of American Industrial Power". HBS Working Knowledge. 2023-05-03. We tend to think of intellectual piracy as a recent phenomenon, but of course humans have been stealing from each other since the first caveman to harness fire saw his or her IP spread without credit like, well, wildfire. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But in what sense was any "caveman" in "competition" with other humans he was in regular contact with (without killing, eating, or fleeing from them)? Up to the Neolithic (I have always imagined) humans mostly lived in relatively small and related groups and co-operated with regular contacts because they were all living on a knife's edge and could help each other. In such circumstances any -lithic age specialists would have wanted their knowledge spread as widely as possible because it might in future benefit them or their relatives. Anyone know of any papers on the lines of Paleo/Meso/Neolithic social cooperation (or competition)? {The poster formerly known as 87.821.230.195} — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.18.208 (talk) 15:23, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Grime's Graves for a Neolithic tool producing "factory". Complete flint nodules are heavy and awkward to carry, so at least the first stages of tool production would be done on site. There might not have been merchants wandering the countryside, but the flint-knappers would have traded their flint tools for other goods from adjacents settlements, who would then trade them onwards. Why would they want to pass on a skill that was irrelevant away from the mines and could lead to their neighbours not trading? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:49, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Given the considerable efforts that the Grimes Graves miners had to exert to obtain the nodules, they cannot have been readily available anywhere else in the area. Nodule-knapping skills would be of limited use to people who did not have nodules to knap. Not bothering to teach skills to people who have no means of utilising them is not the same as "keeping a trade secret."

Also, having knowledge of a procedure is one thing, having the time to apply it is another. If I had been, say, a farming or hunting neigbor of the miners, I might have known how to knap flints but have had little spare time from my own 'specialist' activities to do so, and would have preferred to trade my produce for knapped flints rather than knap my own. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.213.18.208 (talk) 12:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

90.213.18.208 -- For millions of years, until a little more than 50,000 years ago, stone tools changed in evolutionary time (slowly over thousands of years), and there was very little or no variation between tools made by different groups of the same species. There were no "trade secrets" at that time... AnonMoos (talk) 19:10, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

. RE: cavemen, imagine someone discovers that a certain herb eases pain. Keeping that knowledge to oneself would enhance one's standing within the community. The "competition" would be anyone else who might seek recognition as a healer. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 20:01, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, if the driving philosophy of your culture is keeping as many people alive and well as possible, you WOULD share that knowledge, and perhaps gain kudos that way. It is believed that Australian Aboriginal society tended to work more that way. While on the topic of Australian Aboriginal people, Songline describes a non-written way they had of sharing knowledge. HiLo48 (talk) 23:21, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And that ethos served them exceptionally well for 40-60,000 years. It beats what came later hands down. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:52, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Human attention to the different part of a person

Hi there, I look for a reference to the claim that person pay more attention to the faces than the hands and cloths (for example when they meet someone and want to recognize who is this person). I look also for the name of the phenomena, which an object has parts which have different importance for its recognition by human (some-kind of attention importance)?

Thanks 2A06:C701:4B44:3600:F08A:6497:E38B:D479 (talk) 22:36, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Start by reading Face perception. Cullen328 (talk) 22:39, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IMO face perception, the ability to see that something is a face and to "read" it (interpret the facial expression as conveying information about mental states and processes of its bearer) is another cognitive ability than face recognition (the ability to distinguish people just by facial features and to recognize familiar faces and identify their bearers). Our article Face perception and other articles (Facial recognition system, Prosopagnosia) conflate these. While these abilities are correlated^[4] and many prosopagnosics do experience difficulties classifying facial expressions, case studies have described individuals with developmental prosopagnosia who are able to correctly label photographic displays of facial emotion.^[5] --Lambiam 07:13, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to the ability to recognize and identify people, face recognition is the most studied aspect in the literature.^[6] While the review article I linked to is not a reference directly supporting the claim, the fact that face recognition is the most studied aspect reflects its superior role in recognizing and identifying people. The article also mentions voice, name, body habitus, personal belongings, handwriting, gait and body motion as cues by which one can identify people, but not hands or clothing, which strongly suggests they play a lesser role. A more direct support is from an article reporting on a study of incidents of errors in recognizing people: "Despite the fact that all of the different kinds of input information can lead to much the same types of incident, the majority of incidents recorded involved the facial features as the primary source of information. We do not regard this observation as demonstrating that face recognition is peculiarly prone to error. Rather, it probably reflects the important role that face processing plays in everyday recognition. Faces are much relied on for two reasons. Firstly, visual information is important because we see far more people than we hear voices or see or hear names; secondly, of the different types of visual information the facial features are more likely to be thought veridical in determining the person’s identity than such cues as clothing or hair-style. Thus, it is highly likely that most incidents are reported to faces as the primary source simply because this is the source of information that is most often used."^[7] Note that this is not presented as a conclusion based on any findings of that specific study, but assumed to be general knowledge. --Lambiam 07:58, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking, it's not possible to identify someone from any part of their body except their face. It's the face that has all the unique characteristics, not the butt or wherever else. So we focus on the face, to constantly remind ourselves upon whom we're gazing. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:48, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reportedly, many married women can recognize their (male) spice by a body part that decency laws require to remain unavailable for perusal by others. If we all had the opportunity to gaze freely upon these, I can imagine us developing penile recognition capabilities. --Lambiam 17:15, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hmm? --Jayron 32 17:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. A fingerprint is no more a body part than a person's shadow is. And by "identify", I'm referring to mundane visual observation, not forensic or technological analysis. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The ridges on my fingers are certainly more part of my body than the place where my body blocked a light source. And they are uniquely identifying, in the sense that if you look at the ridges on my fingers, you would find no one else has ridges that look like that. --Jayron 32 18:40, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's a far cry from being shown a finger and being asked to identify, from the ridges alone, whose finger it is. (Not even the world's largest database of fingerprints could do that if the person had never been fingerprinted.) But really, my friend, you seem to be deliberately avoiding my point, which I clarified above as "mundane visual observation". In the course of normal social interaction, if you like. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:53, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 5

Who may be the first one to use the term "gender power gap?

An article Draft:Gender power gap seem to claim that ".. The term gender power gap was coined in March 2020 by António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, .." But going through google scholar Guterres may not be the first one to use the term.

Who may be the first one to use the term "gender power gap? Bookku (talk) 09:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now the question is also whether earlier mentions of the three words together would have constituted a distinct concept or not. But in Google Books we find (in English, that is) The Interplay of Work Power and Family Power - Gender and Power in American Dual-earner Families by Sŏng-hun Yi · 1997 and the periodical Instauration, Volume 9, 1983. --Soman (talk) 12:38, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, if you use google scholar (scholar.google.com) and search for "gender power gap" (use quotes to force the exact phrase), and set the time range to before 2020, you get at least three pages of results, all of which are using it as a distinct concept. The earliest there is 1997: [BOOK] Thinking about gender inequality, H Horikawa - 1997 - search.proquest.com,, … The depth of the global gender power gap is reflected in Japan, which boasts the world's highest levels of human development, according to the 1993 UN Development Report. But.. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 14:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Guterres already used the term in a tweet of 26 February 2020^[8] in which he announced his upcoming speech. He was definitely not the first to use the term. For example, here, page 7,, is a use from 2003, here, also page 7 one from 2014 and here one from 2018 in The Guardian. --Lambiam 17:05, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Surely the draft should link to Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory and missile gap? fiveby(zero) 18:57, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus's sisters

According to NT, Jesus had sisters. Do they appear in any painting or other artwork? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:25, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, only Mark 6:3 and Matthew 13:56 mentions sisters, and they are never named anywhere. This is unlike the Brothers of Jesus, which are named, and several of which we have somewhat substantial information. However, other than literally two identical verses from the Gospels, we have no other information on those sisters. The article on Brothers of Jesus does mention some names from apocryphal gospels, such as the Gospel of Philip, which mentions a sister named Mary, distinct from either the Virgin Mary or Mary Magdalene. --Jayron 32 14:24, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All true (afaik), but nameless Bible-women have turned up in art before, like the wives on the ark, Pharaoh's daughter, Potiphar's wife and Herodia's daughter. Of course, all of these have been named outside the Bible. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, but those unnamed women were also actual characters. Potiphar's wife has no name, but has an actual important part of the biblical narrative. Which is to say that there are actual biblical scenes she appears in the text, which can be documented in painting. Jesus's sisters have no part in any narrative elements anywhere in the bible. They are just noted to exist. --Jayron 32 14:52, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Still, the sisters could have been included in a painting depicting a particular scene/episode from Jesus' life. The Wives aboard Noah's Ark don't have a lot of Biblical action either, but there's at least one painting (ditto movie). But thanks for the "Mary" name, I'll see if I can find a good secondary source for that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:58, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying there isn't. There's a lot of paintings in the world. I'm just saying why the sisters of Jesus, who have no locations in which they were known to be in, like the ark, or are noted as being part of a story that has actual scenes to depict, like the story of Noah's Ark, we know less than that about Jesus's sisters. We know the wives on the ark were on the ark and thus are likely to be depicted in such stories. What stories are Jesus's sisters placed in? What locale were they known to be for artists to depict them in? None. They just exist. That's less than can even be said about the wives of the arkanauts. SO, while I am not saying "there is guaranteed to be no painting of a sister of Jesus ever made, in the history of everything that has ever been painted" what I am saying is "Here are some reasons why you're not going to easily find something". --Jayron 32 15:11, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The helpdeskers are capable and able, there is hope. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The others are. I'm mostly a roadblock to proper operation of everything around here. --Jayron 32 15:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had a bit of a rummage through Google, but drew a blank. Any search similar to "sisters of Jesus" just brings up lots of nuns. Doesn't seem to be anything in Wikimedia Commons either. Alansplodge (talk) 17:15, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, that's pretty much what I got too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While the canonical texts do not name the sisters or even give their number, several apocryphal and other extracanonical sources name them as Joanna, Mary, and Salome.^[9] There are many representations of this triad. This sister Mary is often identified with "the other Mary" in Matthew 28:1 and "Mary the mother of James" in Mark 16:1. The latter verse also mentions Salome. (Some scholars maintain that this "canonical" Salome cannot be the same person as the "apocryphal" Salome, but I find the arguments unconvincing.) --Lambiam 17:55, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good finds! Though it should be noted that most Christian traditions don't consider the Myrrhbearers to be the sisters of Jesus. I mean, you can find a lot of speculation on this stuff, so you can find just about any source that says anything if you try hard enough, very few biblical scholars would consider any of this evidence to be convincing. Indeed, I'm not entirely sure that images of the myrrhbearers were painted to be sisters of Jesus; the so-called "women at the tomb" aren't traditionally thought of that way. --Jayron 32 17:57, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reliable independent historical evidence of any of the characters or narratives in the New Testament other than Caesar Augustus, King Herod and Pontius Pilate. Which early Christian works became canonical scripture and which were relegated to the apocrypha has little to do with their historicity, and more with the dominant theological thought during the period in which some of the Christian scripture attained canon status. Once we start speculating that the narratives in early Christian works may have a historical basis, there is IMO no good reason to exclude apocrypha merely for not being canonical. --Lambiam 07:57, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems we have 'Helvidian' (children of Joseph and Mary), 'Epiphanian' (children of Joseph), and 'Hieronymian' (cousins) views, and John P. Meier in Marginal Jew the most notable Helvidian? ~~Plenty of sources for a full article if someone starts.~~ Brothers of Jesus#Relationship to Jesus fiveby(zero) 13:22, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bauckham, Richard (1991). "Salome the Sister of Jesus, Salome the Disciple of Jesus, and the Secret Gospel of Mark". Novum Testamentum. JSTOR 1561359.
Sivertsen, Barbara (May 2005). "New Testament Genealogies and the Families of Mary and Joseph". Biblical Theology Bulletin. 35 (2). wp library link

Lambiam -- you're missing at least the Tetrarchs and Gamaliel. And probably a number of others, if being mentioned in Josephus counts (see the appropriate sections of "List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources")... AnonMoos (talk) 07:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Walker Texas Ranger

Can you help me to find if Hayes Cooper was or no modeled after a real-life Texas Ranger? Thank you very much.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.194.57 (talk • contribs)

Do you mean the main character of The Magician (French TV series)? If so, it has nothing to do with the Texas Rangers (either the law enforcement agency OR the baseball team). --Jayron 32 17:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, a past character in "Walker Texas Ranger", played by Chuck Norris.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.194.57 (talk • contribs)

I can find no such character listed at List of Walker, Texas Ranger characters. If they were on the show, it was a very minor role indeed. --Jayron 32 17:53, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Best Of Hayes Cooper No, according to Marshall Trimble here. Ooops, missed "modeled after", in OP's request. fiveby(zero) 19:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Trimble's negative reply to "Did such a man exist?" also excludes the existence of historical characters after which the fictional Hayes Cooper might be modeled. --Lambiam 07:41, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hayes Cooper is mentioned several times in List of Walker, Texas Ranger episodes. Chuck Norris has the show's title role but sometimes plays a different Texas Ranger in episodes set in the Wild West past. Maybe it's enough to be added to List of Walker, Texas Ranger characters#Recurring characters. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:43, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Robespierre

Please, can you help me to find if his parents, paternal and maternal grandparents, and sister Henriette were loyals to the absolute monarchy, then royalists of the ancien regime, unlike he, Augustin, and Charlotte? Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.194.57 (talk) 17:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Robespierre's mother died in childbirth when Robespierre was 6, and his father basically abandoned the family, and very little is known of him except that he occasionally dropped in out of nowhere to say "Hi" (like a typical deadbeat dad) and that he died in 1777, which was some time before the revolution. Here is the article about the father at fr.wikipedia. His paternal grandfather died in 1762, also well before the Revolution, as noted at Maximilien's article at fr.wikipedia. His paternal grandmother is not noted at all there, and I can find not even a name. His maternal grandfather, Jacques Carraut, died in 1778 according to the same article. Nothing is mentioned about his maternal grandmother, I also can't find even her name. Regarding Henriette, I also can find little to nothing about her except her name, and unreliable sources like this noting that she died at age 18 in 1780. If true, she also never lived long enough to come close to the Revolution. So, regarding the people you ask about, they all died well before the Revolution, a decade or more before anyone would have been seriously thinking about a Republican France in any meaningful sense.--Jayron 32 17:39, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, then can you search if there are films about Robespierre's family and photos of those family members' graves? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.244.234.59 (talk) 08:57, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do the Chinese think of the Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

The Chinese people were the victims of Japan's aggression during World War II, such the Nanking Massacre and the torturous medical experiments conducted by Unit 731, but what do they think about the A-bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? 95.144.204.68 (talk) 19:15, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

China is the 1 or 2 most populated country of the world. Surely they don't have a single and unified opinion about this or any other topic. Cambalachero (talk) 19:32, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay well, what do most Chinese people think of the A-bombings Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 95.144.204.68 (talk) 20:43, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How would you go about taking an opinion poll in China? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:13, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TikTok? Blueboar (talk) 21:24, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok… seriously, I would suspect that the opinions of the Chinese are as mixed varied and at times even contradictory as the the opinions of rest of the world: some likely find the use of the bombs abhorrent … others a sad necessity, ultimately saving more lives than if not used… a few will see it as a good thing (revenge) … and yet others as a simple historical fact without giving any moral judgement … and I am sure that there are some youngsters who have never heard of it, and so have no opinion at all. Blueboar (talk) 21:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What's the party's opinion? It will be the only one voiced by the vast majority of the population whatever their private thoughts. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 22:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Googling "chinese opinion of hiroshima and nagasaki", here's one possible answer:[10] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:14, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps gtransalting 廣島與長崎原子彈爆炸 will provide a hint. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:42, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also Popular Responses to the Atomic Bomb in China 1945–1955. Editors can access the whole article via The Wikipedia Library. Alansplodge (talk) 14:27, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note to other RefDesk editors; please check the answerabilty of a question before rushing to dismiss. "It is by politeness, etiquette and charity that society is saved from falling into a heap of savagery" says William of Wykeham. Alansplodge (talk) 14:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 6

Prime Minister with non-English accent

Has there ever been a British Prime Minister with a Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish accent? 86.130.77.121 (talk) 18:06, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accents are tricky, and any answer may come down to subjective judgement. I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest though that Lloyd George had more than a trace of a Welsh accent, albeit one heavily influenced by received pronunciation. Listen to this British Pathé recording from 1931. [11] AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:14, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm listening to a bit of Gordon Brown and there seem to be hints of a Scottish accent (a pretty flat "know", for instance), but disappointingly weak given that he was born in Glasgow and to my knowledge spent most of his life in Scotland. --Wrongfilter (talk) 18:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To me, an Englishman who lived in Scotland for several years, Brown's Scottish accent was always pretty obvious. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.213.18.208 (talk) 19:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that Ramsay MacDonald had more of an accent than Brown. Like Lloyd George though, strong RP elements too? It is entirely possible that both Lloyd George and MacDonald's accents varied noticeably with register. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:01, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Blair is also Scottish. Discuss. Hayttom (talk) 01:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Discuss."

All right, although it doesn't directly answer the original question (i.e. I'm probably starting a diversionary tangent), over half a dozen British Prime Ministers since 1900 have been Scots, although most of them with Received Pronunciation from family, public schools or Oxbridge (e.g. Macmillan, Blair and Cameron):

† My parents liked to quote Ramsay MacDonald's appreciation of Robert Burns on the record you can hear here (10 min. total) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbVGIqxhe0s The accent (perhaps because of the subject or the audience, no doubt on Burns' Night) is, to my ear, far more Scottish than anything else. —— Shakescene (talk) 02:50, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can hear the voices of 15 UK Prime Ministers at this Sporcle quiz (plus pointers to others going back to Gladstone in the comments section): https://www.sporcle.com/games/dolebanana/righthonourableprimeminister

You can also hear samples (at least one full sentence) of Gladstone, Asquith, Lloyd George and everyone from Baldwin to Theresa May here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hP0h4AP0Voo.

—— Shakescene (talk) 03:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, David Lloyd George had a recognisably Welsh accent. [12] Alansplodge (talk) 11:13, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

David Lloyd George was born in England, but should certainly be considered Welsh. He is the only PM whose native tongue was not English. Hayttom (talk) 13:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 7

Non-English Royal family members

Are any members of the British Royal family Welsh, Scottish, Irish or American? 86.130.77.121 (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 260: / Line 260: @@
 = May 7 =
+== Non-English Royal family members ==
+Are any members of the British Royal family Welsh, Scottish, Irish or American? [[Special:Contributions/86.130.77.121|86.130.77.121]] ([[User talk:86.130.77.121|talk]]) 20:56, 7 May 2023 (UTC)