Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

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.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

December 24

How did Germany feel about Ukraine and Ukrainians in the Imperial and Weimar German eras?

How did Germany feel about Ukraine and Ukrainians in the Imperial and Weimar German eras? Seems like a relevant question considering that Germany occupied Ukraine during World War I, again during World War II, and is currently expanding its sphere of influence (specifically the European Union) into Ukraine yet a third time within a century! So, Yeah, I was wondering how exactly the typical Germans felt about Ukraine and Ukrainians under Bismarck, under Kaiser Wilhelm II, under the various Weimar German governments, and even in the early years of Nazi rule in Germany.

Thoughts? Futurist110 (talk) 00:22, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Many Germans might not have been clearly aware of a separate Ukrainian identity until various tumultuous events near the end of WW1, since Ukrainians had been commonly refered to as "Little Russians", inhabitants of "Little Russia" (Kleinrussland). AnonMoos (talk) 12:22, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Imperial German plans for Central Asia during World War I?

Did Imperial Germany ever make any plans for Central Asia during World War I? If so, what were these plans (as in, what exactly did these plans consist of) and when were these plans made? Futurist110 (talk) 00:26, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Central Asia is an awful long way away from the Russian imperial capital of St. Petersburg. I doubt that Germany ever had any plans to go that far and what purpose it could possibly have served. Xuxl (talk) 15:17, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

The purpose (well, one theoretical purpose) of this would have been to secure a German pivot point to China. Futurist110 (talk) 21:06, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

The Germans already had holdings in China (Qingdao), so why would they need to go the long, long, long way through central Asia? On the other hand, they were silly enough to concoct Imperial German plans for the invasion of the United States. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:40, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

It would be more to promote economic development in that part of the world. Futurist110 (talk) 21:33, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Germany only entered the First World War because it had agreed to defend the Austrians against the Russians, who were themselves acting in defence of Serbia. As far as I can tell, there was no plan for world domination analogous to the fantasies of the Nazis. Alansplodge (talk) 15:14, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Not world domination, just a continuous German sphere of influence extending from the German border all of the way up to the Chinese border. Futurist110 (talk) 21:16, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

I have never seen anything that might support that theory. Alansplodge (talk) 10:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

There's a reason as to why these things are called alternate history. :) Futurist110 (talk) 21:33, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Is that like an alternative fact? ;-) Alansplodge (talk) 18:04, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Apparently Paul Rohrbach had some ideas. Also Central Asia played an important role in WWI Ottoman plans and propaganda. You can find some information in this downloadable file (for example at page 20 or searching "Turkestan" in the text): https://www.mediafire.com/file/skr85v0qh19m2v0/WWI.doc/file --79.31.10.126 (talk) 19:27, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Will check out! Futurist110 (talk) 21:33, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

You would do well to read Peter Hopkirk's On Secret Service East of Constantinople: The Plot to Bring Down the British Empire, 1994 ISBN 0719550173, published in the USA as Like Hidden Fire: The Plot to Bring Down the British Empire. DuncanHill (talk) 15:51, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Photo of David Allison McKinley

Trying to find a photograph of David Allison McKinley, brother of William McKinley. I am only aware of the sketch from his obituary. KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:49, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Google Image "David Allison McKinley" and a couple of photos turn up. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:40, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

No nothing shows up. Just images of William McKinley, their father and mother and other family members. I wouldn't ask a question I could google. KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:16, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Oops, you're right. The image labeled "David Allison McKinley" is actually William Sr. I went to Ancestry.com (pay site) and the only thing anyone seems to have is that same profile sketch. If he appears in family photos, it's possible none were ever scanned for public consumption. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:51, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

One obvious place to look is in printed biographies of William McKinley. Of course, to browse them you'd have to have access to a library that was open. No such thing around here just now. I poked around in Google Books but didn't find anything relevant. --174.95.161.129 (talk) 08:31, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Out of curiosity--when and where was his obituary published? Futurist110 (talk) 08:34, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

In The San Francisco Chronicle of September 19, 1892, page 10.^[1] Both a news item and an obituary.  --Lambiam 11:18, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

There are several biographies of William McKinley at archive.org but although there are lots of pictures of his parents, there don't seem to be any of his brother. Alansplodge (talk) 14:19, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Question about Ancient Chinese courtesy names

I'm working on Cai Lun's article and his courtesy name is Jingzhong. I'm wondering if in the Han Dynasty there was a specific time in someone's life when courtesy names would be given, or if it was completely circumstantial. The issue is that I'd like to include this info in the body of the article (to get the citation out of the lead!), but I'm not sure where to put it since it isn't known when Cai received his courtesy name. Best - Aza24 (talk) 09:50, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

The article on courtesy names says men received them at adulthood, or age 20, citing the Book of Rites. I can't say for sure whether that practice continued into the Han, or whether it necessarily applied in the same way to eunuchs like Cai Lun. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 19:07, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Was Tynemouth in Northumberland in 1957?

Was Tynemouth in Northumberland in 1957? “Asking for a friend.”

I do mean administratively as well as historically. The article talks of changes in 1974 but …

Thank you!

Ceremonially, yes. Administratively, no. It had its own county borough which was independent of Northumberland county council and included North Shields. Valenciano (talk) 14:40, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

See also; A history of Northumberland, Volume VIII: The Parish of Tynemouth (1907). Alansplodge (talk) 15:00, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Valenciano and Alansplodge, both of you, very much. The Craster (1907) work is lovely but doesn't tell me what was going on 50 years later in 1957; and Valenciano can you please tell me if you are saying definitely that the County Borough of Tynemouth was still in existence in 1957, and do you have a ref for that, please? I would really like to read up on this and get it straight in my own head. Er I mean of course the "friend's" head ... on whose behalf I am asking ... ahem. Thanks! DBaK (talk) 21:07, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

You'll see all of them as they existed at 1970 at this link. Valenciano (talk) 21:34, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

And to back that up in text; "Finally, on 1 April 1974, under the 1972 Local Government Act, Tynemouth C.B. was abolished and became part of the newly-created Metropolitan District of North Tyneside" The National Archives - Tynemouth County Borough. Alansplodge (talk) 10:34, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Apparently, on 24 March 1974, the “County Borough of Tynemouth Terminal Celebrations” took place, in which the Tynemouth Scouts took part in a March-Past at the Town Hall (they certainly knew how to throw a party). Alansplodge (talk) 10:48, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, both – absolutely nailed it. My friend will be most appreciative and interested! Cheers DBaK (talk) 01:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

"You can't board our drug-trafficking boat! We are flagged Panama!"

How do flags of convenience rules work in practice, when the boat or ship in question is on the "high seas" (i.e. international waters), and a Navy ship suspects them of being drug runners?

I'm imagining something like this story. How would the Navy ship crew be allowed to board the ship when faced with a boat/ship armed with... a Panamanian flag?! Assuming the Panama registration is genuine, of course?

If it were that simple, surely drug-runners would have zealously exploited flags of convenience? What gives? Do the major "flag of convenience" states regularly give warrants for operations such as the one described in the article I linked to? OR, is there some "loophole" which allows this sort of military operation?

I know pirates and slave traders are deemed "hostis humani generis", and thus may be apprehended by any nation, even one that has not been attacked... is some similar rule or law of the sea at play here with drug-runners? Or something else?

(Note, my question is limited to operations in full-fledged "international waters". I'm well aware that in a country's territorial waters, or even its exclusive economic zone, it would likely have authority to carry out or authorize such operations). Eliyohub (talk) 16:13, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm a US Coast Guard Auxiliarist; my understanding from the Active Duty folk is that drug smuggling is illegal under international law, so it doesn't matter what flag they're flying. This document seems to support that: https://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/organized_crime/CNA%20Directory/English_ebook.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luisa Koala (talk • contribs) 17:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Can the Coast Guard Seize a Vessel in International Waters? [Slate; 2001-05-15]:

"When a suspicious vessel is identified at sea, the Coast Guard notifies the State Department, which then gets permission from the vessel’s flag nation for the Coast Guard to board. (In the rare instances when permission is denied, the Coast Guard will generally monitor the vessel as it approaches U.S. territory.)"

See also Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act.

Hmm. "An Act implemented and routinely used by the United States Coast Guard allowing them to board foreign ships on the high seas under allegations of drug trafficking." from the infobox sounds more like a description than a "long title". Is that the proper use of that field?

See also Limits of Coast Guard Authority to Board Foreign Flag Vessels on the High Seas [USCG; 1997-04-29]. -- ToE 17:38, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Long titles can look like that, but I'm pretty sure that's not the right one. Also the "public law" citation in the infobox is wrong. As may be the year of passage. There were only 664 public laws passed by the 99th Congress, and none have a title of "Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act" or anything resembling the supposed long title. Wow that's a bad article. It primarily relies on a student note in Fordham Law Review (there are 11 footnotes pointing to it).

I am almost certain it's Title II, Subtitle C of Pub. L. 99-570, 100 Stat. 3207. Formerly codified at 46 U.S.C. §§ 1902 et seq. The actual short name of the law is "Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Prosecution Improvements Act of 1986", it does not appear to have a long name of its own, and it was part of the "Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986". 69.174.144.79 (talk) 19:35, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Do the treaties that banned cocaine, marijuana etc say anything about checking ships for them on high seas? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Article 17 of the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988 covers this [2]. The relevant paragraph reads: "A Party which has reasonable grounds to suspect that a vessel exercising freedom of navigation in accordance with international law, and flying the flag or displaying marks of registry of another Party is engaged in illicit traffic may so notify the flag State, request confirmation of registry and, if confirmed, request authorization from the flag State to take appropriate measures in regard to that vessel." You can read the rest of the article to see how boarding proceeds. Xuxl (talk) 00:50, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Drug trafficking is not a violation of any jus cogens norm of which I'm aware, such that traffickers could be considered the kin of pirates and slavers. Hell, even whalers aren't considered that. I recommend reading about the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is a multilateral treaty that might discuss rights to arrest and search ships on the high seas, if there is any such right. But, it's important to note that in the international arena, the laws are more for the protection of the nation state than the individuals. If the U.S. Coast Guard arrested and boarded a drug trafficking ship on the high seas (i.e., outside any EEZ/territorial claims) the ship owners and seamen would have no recourse in the courts to claim that the seizure was an internationally wrongful act. The flag nation could complain to the U.N., and if it seriously cared (as it might if this were a common issue or involved conduct like the harassment of fishing vessels or passenger liners) the flag nation might bring an action before the International Court of Justice (or, if it were almost any nation but the United States, before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea). 69.174.144.79 (talk) 21:43, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Side comment: this thread reminds me of a moment in the movie Lord of War where a gun-running ship is approached by authorities and changes things to disguise its identity. One of the things that's changed is what flag they're flying: as I recall, not so that they would be immune from being stopped, but just to look like a different ship than the one that authorities were seeking. Anyway, it turns out that their box of flags doesn't include the one they want... so they fake it by flying another country's flag turned sideways. I haven't seen the movie since it was in first-run, but I think the two countries were probably France and the Netherlands. --174.95.161.129 (talk) 03:55, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

It would need some very swift knife and needlework to convert a flag that way. Maybe you could make a small French flag from a big Netherlands one, but it just wouldn't work the other way around. Alansplodge (talk) 10:28, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

No, they just hung it sideways and hoped that this wouldn't be noticed. --174.95.161.129 (talk) 11:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

December 25

Norwood

From April 25, 1866 to August 11, 1866, a ship named Norwood sailed from London to Auckland. Any source on this ship and where it stopped over along this journey? This ship would have taken William Hoapili Kaʻauwai and Kiliwehi from Europe to New Zealand. KAVEBEAR (talk) 09:11, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

THE SMART SHIP NORWOOD says: "The Norwood's third trip, still in command of Captain Bristow, was made in 1866. She left Gravesend on April 28, and reached Auckland on August 11. She brought out cargo and 65 passengers. In the Southern Ocean she struck a hurricane, which carried away the quarter galley and top-gallant bulwark besides doing other damage".

Also the passenger list which doesn't seem to include your Hawaiians (unless they were working their passage as part of the crew).

For the route taken, see clipper route (presumably it was non-stop). Alansplodge (talk) 10:18, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

No they are there as Mr. and Mrs. Hospili [sic] as Saloon Passengers. Where would ships during this period stop off between destinations? Presumably South Africa and Australia (maybe also India)? I can't imagine they would be on the open ocean for 3.5 months KAVEBEAR (talk) 10:52, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Never mind saw your second comment. KAVEBEAR (talk) 10:53, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

"The sailing ships had also refined the skill of sailing non-stop between England and New Zealand or Australia by taking a course that made use of prevailing winds and followed an approximation of the shortest 'Great Circle' route". [3] Alansplodge (talk) 20:35, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

interesting that he was an aide to King Kamehameha IV, who declared Christmas an official holiday in Hawaii, in 1862. Gfigs (talk) 07:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

what makes a city monumental

Whenever I visit a monumental city, meaning that is a tourist attraction and has a beauty, I always ask my self what makes city monumental.
Usually old but planned city gets a lot of attraction. So what makes city look good, and what makes city look bad?
--Exx8 (talk) 12:14, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Define "good" and "bad". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:24, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Exx8 and Baseball Bugs, here is one source that came up with criteria and made a list: World's Most Beautiful Cities. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:54, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure that "monumental city" is a widely used term (according to this, Baltimore is known as "The Monumental City", or at least it was in 1850). I don't know if London would fit into your definition; it certainly has more monuments than you could shake a stick at, but is also free from the slightest trace of planning, with the possible exception of Regent Street and the London squares. It just grow'd like Topsy. Alansplodge (talk) 14:25, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

It's still in use, and here's where it came from.[4] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

"Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries". What's the gist? Alansplodge (talk) 00:18, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

It was first used in a DC newspaper in 1823, in reference to the city's under-construction George Washington monument, and was later repeated by President John Q. Adams, to whom it is sometimes erroneously attributed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:23, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

So what does it mean now? Outside of Baltimore that is. Alansplodge (talk) 12:44, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

We'll have to wait for the OP to come back and answer that. He only edits sporadically. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Or you could reread the question, where the phrase was explained: "a monumental city, meaning that is a tourist attraction and has a beauty". --174.95.161.129 (talk) 07:04, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Most every city fits that broad description. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Prosecuting nazis

I watched a doc, The Devil Next Door, about one John Demjaniuk who was supposedly a Nazi war criminal called Ivan the Terrible. The USA claimed they didn't have jurisdiction over crimes in Ukraine, so they just sent him to Israel to be tried there. Then later he was tried in Germany. I have a feeling that the US could have tried him if they really wanted to. How is jurisdiction decided in cases like this? Crimes that happened elsewhere, long ago? Some crimes were committed in countries that don't even exist any more. Temerarius (talk) 23:41, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

In recent years there's an International Criminal Court which is supposed to try high-level genociders. And special UN things for specific geographic areas have tried genociders. If a major Nazi showed up hopefully they would do a better job trying than they do with stopping African wars and stuff. Edit: However neither the US nor Ukraine has ratified.

Technically most United States laws do not have jurisdiction on non-Americans in other countries (besides embassies maybe) so who knows what's the best justification for trying him they could've come up with if they wanted the trial harder, I am not a lawyer. Maybe something similar to the any country can try pirates thing? In the biggest case of this type (at least after Nuremberg)Adolf Eichmann ended up being tried by Israel cause they were the first unsympathizing* country to know where he was and were worried the country he hid in might neither extradite him nor punish him sufficiently if they told them they knew. And there's no more powerful Jewish-majority country to send him to like how a British court is the top court of some independent Commonwealth countries. So for such a big fish they snuck him out of the country to Israel, changed the law to allow non-Israelis to defend people charged with capital crimes and tried him on 15 charges including crimes against humanity, war crimes, crimes against the Jewish people and membership in a criminal organisation. German defense lawyers and "I was just following orders" didn't beat the evidence and after appealing to the top he was hung. *technically true whether his hosts had no idea or not. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:23, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)This is a beautifully complex issue, to which one could dedicate many books. But as a preliminary matter, I suggest reading about extraterritorial jurisdiction and universal jurisdiction. The specific fact pattern you articulate: A person in the United States accused of being a Nazi war criminal would not likely be subject to the criminal law jurisdiction of the United States. Universal jurisdiction is not well accepted in the United States. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 01:26, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

As our article on John Demjanjuk explains, Demjanjuk was almost definitely not Ivan the Terrible. He was innocent of that. He went home to the US, then later was accused of being a different guard at a different camp, and on the basis of that was denaturalized and deported to Germany, where he was convicted, but died before his appeal could be finalized, which according to German law makes him technically innocent.

I am not familiar with the details of the evidence on the second charge. But I do tend to find myself a bit more skeptical than I might have been if he hadn't been first prosecuted for being an entirely different guard. --Trovatore (talk) 01:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Note, though, that the allegation of Demjanjuk having been a guard at the Sobibor camp was first made in the US in 1975 and predated the 1976 identification by Treblinka survivors as Ivan the Terrible. Details are presented in the book The Right Wrong Man: John Demjanjuk and the Last Great Nazi War Crimes Trial.  --Lambiam 14:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

He was not Ivan, a witness at the Israel trial said he was and they declined to prosecute for being a different camp's guard when the Ivanness was sorted out. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:24, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

He was a terrible Ivan, only not the Terrible Ivan.  --Lambiam 14:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

December 26

Ho ho ho

Santa Claus in America is always laughing sounding "Ho ho ho". How did this start? From a movie or a book? Thank you. Hevesli (talk) 01:36, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Probably because that's what people in the 19th century thought that a jolly person would say. Not as close to laughing as "ha ha ha" or "heh heh heh", but sort of in the same ballpark. AnonMoos (talk) 09:32, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Nothing specific yet, but A History of Engliah Dramatic Literature, London 1875 (p. 53) says in a footnote: "'Ho ho ho' and 'Oute Haro out out' are the exclamations by which the Devil is wont to announce himself in the miracles. In Jonson's The Devil Is an Ass Satan enters with the usual 'Hoh, hoh, hoh,' an evident reminiscence from the old mysteries and moralities". Alansplodge (talk) 12:34, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

The Welvome Guest: A Magazine of Recreative Reading for All, London 1861 (pp. 571-572) quotes a poem attributed to Ben Jonson about Robin Goodfellow (a mischievous spirit or fairy, also known as Puck): "More swift than winde away I go / O'er hedge and lands / Through pools and ponds / I whirry laughing Ho! Ho! Ho!".

Also Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream has Puck saying "Ho, ho, ho! Coward, why comest thou not?" (Act III, Scene II).

How Father Christmas followed on from Satan and Puck is the missing link at the moment. Alansplodge (talk) 12:58, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

According to EO, "ho-ho-ho" representing laughter has been around for about 800 years.[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, perhaps I was over-thinking it... Alansplodge (talk) 14:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

The earliest reference I can find directly connecting Father Christmas / Santa Claus with the phrase is a song by William Batchelder Bradbury called The Christmas Tree, or Kris Kringle, which appears in his Fresh Laurels for the Sabbath School New York 1867 (No. 148):

"O, this is Santa Claus's man, Kris Kringle with his Christmas tree. Oh ho, Oh ho, ho, ho, ho, ho, ho, ho, ho..."

Interestingly, here Kris Kringle is portrayed as a separate character to Santa Claus; Wikipedia suggests a connection with the German Christkind, although that doesn't really seem to fit with Bradbury's lyrics. Alansplodge (talk) 14:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Wiktionary gives German Christkindl as the etymon of Kris Kringle. In the American tradition two end-of-the-year gift-bringers became conflated.  --Lambiam 14:48, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks all for answering, but the wide spread of the phenomenon still puzzles me. If the American child hears "ho ho ho" she knows that Santa Claus is around the corner. Jolly people don't laugh all the time, but Santa Claus does. He could only laugh "ho ho" or make a change "ha ha ha" but it is always "ho ho ho". How to explain this is become so completely fixed is what I don't understand. Hevesli (talk) 14:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

As another data point, The Life and Adventures of Santa Claus from 1902 has him living for a while in the Laughing Valley of Hohaho, suggesting both that the hos were entrenched but not yet quite in their current formulation. The Puck quote is an interesting one; he seems to be using it the way many people do now - not quite an earnest laugh, but a show of haughtiness or sarcasm. Matt Deres (talk) 15:00, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Because he has three gardens. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Or, keeps company with three prostitutes? 2603:6081:1C00:1187:3126:540A:D85A:8430 (talk) 19:48, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Bad Santa wants a hoe, hoe, hoe. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

just a sad Christmas "song".. Gfigs (talk) 07:48, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

HMS Clio (1858)

Trying to find the port of calls and dates for HMS Clio (1858) in 1865. It landed in Honolulu from Valparaíso on April 9, 1865 and left on May 6. Presumably touched based in Mexico and Panama in June. When did it leave Valparaíso? Some sources mentioned that it was going around the world so where did it come from before Valparaíso and did it make a circumnavigation that year after leaving Panama? KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

It sailed to Valparaiso from the Juan Fernández Islands, arriving on 22 February 1865. Later that year, in December, it was in Fort Rupert, shelling a First Nations village. --Antiquary (talk) 19:56, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

It served on the British Columbia coast from 1864 to 1868. On its way out to Valparaiso in late 1864 it touched at Madeira, Ascension and the Falklands. If its return voyage in 1868 was via the Pacific and Indian Oceans then that might explain any talk about a circumnavigation. --Antiquary (talk) 20:21, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Orkhan

Orhan Gazi

I'd like know to know the original source/age of this leadimage, preferably with something to cite in the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:23, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Konstantin Kapıdağlı and John Young. The series was published in 1815 as "Portraits of the Emperors of Turkey from the Foundation of the Monarchy to the year 1808". KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Most excellent. Thanks! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:56, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

December 27

Anti-neutron bomb parody ad

Was there ever a full-page ad taken out in The Washington Post (or some other prominent US paper) sometime in the 1970s by an anti-nuclear organization (perhaps Greenpeace) promoting a parody of the idea of a neutron bomb -- that is, a device which would somehow destroy military infrastructure and weapons but not harm people? (The question is based on the recollection of a friend that we've not been able to verify.) -- ToE 03:24, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

The neutron bomb is supposed to kill people and leave the infrastructure relatively intact[6] AboutFace 22 (talk) 15:45, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

The question reads like he knew that. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:23, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Correct. The neutron bomb was the center of protests and political uproar in "1977-78 and again in 1981".[7] The ad my friend recalls was from this period and advocated, in a tongue-in-cheek manner, for a device which worked oppositely. (Though our article doesn't mention it, I assume The Nude Bomb AKA The Return of Maxwell Smart, released in May 1980, similarly parodied the neutron bomb.) -- ToE 14:19, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Additional cases of demographic reversals?

Which cases have there been where a country's or territory's demographics significantly changed only to eventually return to what they previously were?

Off the top of my head, I can think of:

• German settlement in Eastern Europe during the Middle Ages (Ostsiedlung) and beyond, only to see this reversed in the 20th century as a result of mass expulsions of Germans from Eastern Europe in the aftermath of World War II and also mass emigration of Germans from Romania and the former Soviet Union back to Germany after the end of the Cold War.
• Polish settlement in the Kresy (the eastern territories of Poland before 1939). A lot of Poles settled in the Kresy in the second millennium only to have this trend be reversed in the 20th century as a result of Stalin's deportation of Poles from the Kresy back to Poland.
• The exodus of the Jews from Palestine in Roman times and their subsequent return to Palestine through mass aliyah by the millions in the 20th and 21st centuries.
• Russian settlement in the "Near Abroad" during Tsarist and Soviet times, which was in large part (though certainly not completely) reversed after the collapse of the Soviet Union--when many of these Russians moved back to Russia.
• The settlement of large numbers of Europeans (pieds-noirs) in Algeria in the 19th and early 20th centuries only to see these Europeans be expelled from Algeria in 1962 (which is when Algeria gained its independence from France). A similar trend might have also occurred on a smaller scale in various other African and Third World countries.
• The settlement of large numbers of Non-Hispanic White people in the Southwestern U.S. in the 19th and 20th centuries, followed by a massive increase in the Hispanic percentage of the total population in the Southwestern U.S. in the late 20th and 21st centuries as a result of large-scale Hispanic immigration. The Southwestern U.S. had a huge Hispanic percentage before it was conquered by the U.S. in 1848 and its demographics are gradually reverting to what they were before the U.S. conquest of these territories.
• The Greco-Turkish population exchange in the early 1920s eliminating the millennia-long Greek presence in Anatolia.
• The Reconquista of Spain by Christian Europeans between 1000 and 1492, which ultimately culminated in the expulsion of Arabs, Muslims, Moors, and Moriscos from Spain in spite of them having a centuries-long presence in Spain up to that point, ever since the Umayyad conquest of Spain back in 711. What applies to Spain is, of course, also true for Portugal, which was also liberated from Muslim rule in the early second millennium.
• The flight of the Muhacirs (some of whom were Turks and the rest of whom were other Muslims) from places such as the Balkans back to the Ottoman Empire/Turkey over the last couple of centuries as the centuries-long Ottoman presence in the Balkans disappeared and ended. There were no (or few) Turks and Muslims in the Balkans in 1200, a lot more Turks and Muslims in the Balkans in 1700 at the heyday and peak of Ottoman rule there, and again few Turks and Muslims in most of the Balkans right now, in the 21st century.

Anyway, which examples of demographic reversals am I missing/forgetting to list here? Futurist110 (talk) 07:42, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

The "millennium-long Greek presence in Anatolia" lasted closer to two-and-a-half millennia.  --Lambiam 09:33, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I meant to write "millennia" but accidentally wrote "millennium" instead. I have now corrected this typo. Futurist110 (talk) 18:15, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

There was large-scale emigration of Indians to Burma in the late 19th century and early 20th century, resulting in the population of Burma being 16% ethnically Indian by 1939. The Second World War and then Ne Win's expulsions drove most back to India, so that the figure is less than 2% today. Likewise the Rohingya conflict has driven many of the Rohingya, reckoned to be of Bengali descent, back to Bangladesh. --Antiquary (talk) 11:01, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Excellent examples! Futurist110 (talk) 18:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

The Panama Canal Zone used to have a large expatriate American community with all the amenities you'd expect; they all left after the Panama Canal Treaty. I think I have also mentioned at some point the large Indian communities in East Africa that were largely "invited" to leave in the 1960s after Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania achieved independence. That said, more common than leaving is some of these populations being so assimilated into the mainstream that only vestigial traces of their foreign origin remain after a few generations. Xuxl (talk) 14:18, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Was there a lot of intermarriage between African Indians and Sub-Saharan Africans? Futurist110 (talk) 18:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Indian diaspora in Southeast Africa doesn't answer the question directly, but may contain links and references worth investigating. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.56.237 (talk) 19:58, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Futurist110 (talk) 00:11, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

December 28

Princess Diana's interest in clairvoyance - Part 1

The British Royal Family has always had a close relationship with the Church of England and Church of Scotland. The Queen, and her children were married in churches. have attended church services, and been supportive also of other religions.

Princess Diana shared these sentiments. although, she did also have an interest in clairvoyance. and often visited psychics, such as Rita Rodgers, Sally Morgan and Simone Simmons.

how did this interest in clairvoyance develop ? and are there any indications that since the reign of Queen Elizabeth II, other members of the British Royal Family, have had an interest in psychic or paranormal phenomena ? Gfigs (talk) 10:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

There's a story that Queen Victoria consulted a medium called Robert James Lees (1849-1931), although this is doubtful because at the date of his purported first séance, he would have only been 12 years-old. Lees was later involved in the hunt for Jack the Ripper. [8]

Another unconfirmed story has the whole Royal Family holding a séance with a dodgy medium called Lilian Bailey in 1953. [9]

Note that the monarch is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, which has traditionally taken a dim view of Spiritualism.

Alansplodge (talk) 12:11, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

thanks..while ago, I seen a photo of mirror of John Dee, in a museum in UK..Prince Charles is a member of "The Magic Circle". although, that probably has more to do with illusion.. Gfigs (talk) 12:33, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Prince Philip has, reportedly,^[10][11] a keen interest in flying saucers and extraterrestrials.  --Lambiam 13:05, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

really..Freemasons such as Arthur Conan Doyle had an interest in spiritualism..there was a controversy over this..also thought about J.K.Rowling's and The Ghost Club Gfigs (talk) 13:57, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex reportedly consulted a clairvoyant in her pre-royal days [12]. --Antiquary (talk) 14:05, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

ah ha..hope they can be happy, in the US..Gfigs (talk) 14:15, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this qualifies as "paranormal", but the Royal Family is known for their advocacy of homeopathy (e.g:[13]). 2603:6081:1C00:1187:DDE3:6CAA:B88F:3DD (talk) 18:28, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

not really, although the aim of Raupert's book The Dangers of Spiritualism - John Godfrey Raupert (1858-1929) was to prove that involvement in spiritualism could cause "health problems" and "accidents". what those who were religious, might have considered to be a Curse.Gfigs (talk) 04:12, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Heatherden Hall and the Anglo-Irish Treaty

Until I removed it yesterday our article Heatherden Hall contained a claim that the Anglo-Irish Treaty was signed there. I have seen similar claims elsewhere on the net, perhaps the most specific is the claim here that "The fireplace in what was now the Cocktail Bar, showed the following inscription: ‘In this room, on November 3, 1921, the ratification of the Irish Free State Treaty was settled by the Earl of Birkenhead, Viscount Long, Viscount Younger of Leckie, Sir Malcolm Fraser, Bart., and Lieut.-Colonel W. Grant Morden, J.P., M.P.’" Now as the Treaty was not signed until the 6th December, and ratification was a matter for the parliaments, clearly whatever happened on the 3rd November at Heatherden wasn't ratification in any sense. Also, all those listed were British Unionist (Conservative) politicians - no Irish and no Liberals amongst them - so obviously wasn't the signing of the Treaty. So - what did happen at Heatherden Hall on the 3rd November 1921? It would be nice too to have a citable source for where the Treaty was signed - I assume 10 Downing St. The copy deposited at the League of Nations simply says "at London". Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 17:51, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Grant-Morden held a shooting party at Heatherden Hall at the weekend 5/6 November but no mention I can find of anything to do with the treaty. The UK Prime Minister was still holding cabinet discussions in London the following weekend about the treaty. MilborneOne (talk) 18:25, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Something from The Lincolnshire Echo in 1933 - It says the plaque was to record that an agreement between Grant-Morden, Lord Birkenhead, Sir George Younger, Sir Malcom Fraser and Lord Long "came to an agreement that the Tory Party would support the Coalition Government's efforts to establish the Irish Free State Treaty". Not exactly the signing of the treaty then. MilborneOne (talk) 18:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Not sure if a master's thesis is a Reliable Source, but Lord Birkenhead and the Irish question has plenty of detail about the negotiations, which were finally signed "At 2:10 a.m., on December 6, 1921" at "the Prime Minister's residence", i.e. No 10 Downing Street (pp. 220-221 or 228-229/272 of the pdf file). There's no mention of Heatherden Hall, but in early November, the British side were mired in arguments about Ulster (some things never change). Alansplodge (talk) 18:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@Alansplodge: thanks, that's an interesting read. Peter Rowland says the Treaty was signed in the Cabinet Room at No. 10 so I've used him to add that to the Treaty article. DuncanHill (talk) 20:18, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@MilborneOne: Are you able to send me the Lincs Echo story, with the date and page number? That sounds like something that we could use in the Heatherden Hall article. DuncanHill (talk) 00:36, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Got the same story through British Newspaper Archive in the Gloucestershire Echo, 28 November 1933, p. 4, in a column by "Pall Mall" called "What They Tell Me", item headed "Political Memorial":

During a week-end visit to play squash rackets at the sports club at Heatherden Hall, in Bucks, I found in the library a commemorative plaque set over the fireplace. It stated that, as the guests of Col. Grant Morden, the former owner, Sir George Younger, Lord Birkenhead, Sir Malcolm Fraser, and Lord Long came to an agreement that the Tory Party would support the Coalition Government's efforts to establish the Irish Free State Treaty.

--Antiquary (talk) 14:00, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

December 29

Alcoholic or drug addicted First Ladies

The article on Betty Ford states: "She also raised awareness of addiction when in the 1970s, she announced her long-running battle with alcoholism and substance abuse, being the first First Lady to do so."

Has there been a second First Lady, I assume of the United States, to admit the same? --†dismas†|^(talk) 02:32, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Googling "first ladies who went to rehab", Betty Ford is the only name I'm seeing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

We could insert, ", and, {{as of|lc=y|December 29, 2020}}, the only,{{citation needed|date=December 2020|reason=How do you know?}}" :).  --Lambiam 14:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

At least cry, at least shoot yourself ...

Sorry to bother wikipedians, but I have an unsolvable problem. Recently I went to https://ilostat.ilo.org/topics/informality/ and downloaded the table "informal employment and informal sector" there, and there was a layout specifically for informal employment in the formal sector and informal employment in the informal sector. Today I go there to clarify links and there is no indicator. Just cry, even shoot, well, there is none in nature at all! Moreover, there is a description of the indicator, but it is generally absent in nature. Please, who knows where he is, please help! --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 15:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Is it being updated? Are other parts of the site available? DOR (HK) (talk) 16:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I do not know --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 08:45, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

The site you visited is the ILO (International Labour Organization)'s display of United Nations labour statistics. At the bottom of that page is "Need help? Click here to email us." I suggest you ask your question there. 84.209.119.241 (talk) 17:08, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

ОК. --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 08:45, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

WWII Southern Rhodesia

Were there pro-German parties/movements/notable people in Southern Rhodesia during WWII? Thanks. --79.31.10.126 (talk) 15:44, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

There were pro-Hitler Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging in South Africa during apartheid and some white Southern Rhodesians were at least as racist as them so probably. The AWB logo is basically the Nazi eagle holding a 3-swastika instead of a 4-swastika and in a red ring so it's not subtle. And of course the flag is a black 3-swastika in a white disc on a red flag. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:50, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I think some conclusions may have been jumped to. In South Africa, at least some, if not many Afrikaners have had a strong antipathy to the British Empire after two Boer Wars in which they were not treated with traditional British fair-play (see Second Boer War concentration camps for example). Germany supported the Boer cause during these wars, both morally and supplying arms. A majority of white settlers in Southern Rhodesia were of British or Irish origin and Afrikaners were in a minority, so the two countries were not analogous in that respect.

The linked article says that the colony of Southern Rhodesia declared war before any of the Dominions (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa) in 1939; "This stand was almost unanimously supported by the white populace, as well as most of the coloured community [i.e. mixed-race and Indian], though with World War I a recent memory this was more out ]]. of a sense of patriotic duty than enthusiasm for war in itself". I haven't been able to find any reference for pro-German movements in Rhodesia. Alansplodge (talk) 16:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

So that's why I can't find anything. The Boer War is barely mentioned in the States much less how far the Dutch>Brit zone got so I defer to your expertise. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Our Fascism in Africa article does say, with a reference, that "Other white settlers organised pro-Nazi groups in Rhodesia during the Second World War", though the passage Alan quotes strongly suggests they had little support. --Antiquary (talk) 21:13, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

A bit more digging finds the case of Henry Hamilton Beamish, founder of The Britons, a member of the Imperial Fascist League and the Nordic League and attended Nazi Party conferences in Germany. He emigrated to Southern Rhodesia in 1938 and was elected to parliament as an independent. He lost his seat in 1940 and was interned for the rest of the war. I'm not sure if Defence Regulation 18B (internment of known fascists without trial) applied in the colonies, or if the Rhodesians adopted a similar measure, but it would certainly have curbed any openly fascist activities. Alansplodge (talk) 23:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Pets in the German Democratic Republic

Were people in the GDR allowed to own pets and if so did they have small animal veterinarians? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:6831:A0A0:78EA:9313:6C71:5583 (talk) 17:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Of course (just as long as they weren't capitalist running dogs). See for example the Los Angeles Times article "Much Ado About Dogs in Former East Berlin : The Hundemuseum, with its 20,000 dog-related artifacts, testifies to Germany’s love of canines.": "For 24 years the Laskes served as co-organizers of the biggest kennel show in the Soviet states, drawing 40,000 to 50,000 visitors every May to the grounds of industrialist Werner von Siemens’ villa in Brandenburg. The kennel shows, which drew as many as 25,000 entries, were one of the few major competitions not under government control, the curator said. The accent on improving canine bloodlines was so strong that retirees over 60 were permitted to take winning dogs outside East Germany to compete in international shows." Clarityfiend (talk) 20:39, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

What part of Syria did King Baldwin IV rule?

I got so confused when I heared that Baldwin IV was ruling a part of Syria, how come?

I know that Sultan Salahuddin Ayyubi tried to not make that happen.

If you know that I am wrong of what I am saying, please correct me because I am just curious to find out the truth about this.

I will thank you for your answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarah Shaheenbaz Faizi (talk • contribs) 21:57, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Not present-day Syria but Kingdom of Jerusalem#Geographic boundaries says: "in the mid-12th century, the kingdom encompassed roughly the territory of modern-day Israel, Palestine and the southern parts of Lebanon". Alansplodge (talk) 23:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

See also our article Syria (region) about the historical uses of the term "Syria". In the Gospel of Luke, chapter 2, we read in the story of the nativity of Jesus that Caesar Augustus ordered a census of the Roman Empire while "Kurēnios (Quirinius) was governor of Syria". In the context, this clearly included historical Judea with the city of Bethlehem.  --Lambiam 17:19, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

You may be thinking of these events in 1182:

King Baldwin, accompanied by the Patriarch and the True Cross, thereupon led a raid through the Hauran, which sacked Ezra and reached Bosra, while Raymond of Tripoli recaptured Habis Jaldak. Early in December 1182 Raymond led a cavalry raid that again penetrated to Bosra; and a few days later the royal army set out against Damascus and encamped at Dareiya in the suburbs...The King did not try to attack the city itself, and soon retired laden with booty, to spend Christmas at Tyre.

That was quoted from Steven Runciman A History of the Crusades (1971 [1952]), vol. 2, pp. 434–435. These raids – because that is all they were, not an attempted conquest – could only happen because Salahuddin Ayyubi (Saladin) was much further north in Aleppo at the time, and because the governor of Damascus had just died, doubtless leading to confusion in the city. --Antiquary (talk) 21:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

"Syria" for medieval Europeans could mean the entire Mediterranean coast, what we might now call the "Levant" or even all of the "Near East". The crusaders actually sometimes called their kingdom the "Kingdom of Syria", even though, as mentioned, they didn't really control very much of the modern country of Syria. The "Kingdom of Syria" could also refer to the Ayyubid emirates in Kerak, Homs, Damascus, Aleppo, etc. (as opposed to the "Kingdom of Egypt", the sultanate ruled from Cairo). Adam Bishop (talk) 23:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

December 30

Dravidian secession from India?

How much there was never a huge Dravidian secession movement from India like there was with Muslims in the form of the Pakistan Movement? Futurist110 (talk) 01:41, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

There is a Wikipedia article about this topic here: Dravida Nadu. However, it still doesn't fully explain why there wasn't a huge fear of Indo-Aryan domination among Dravidians similar to how there was a huge fear of Hindu domination among Muslims in British India. Futurist110 (talk) 01:43, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Futurist110 -- There's a long history of Muslims conquering Hindu-populated regions, and Islamic doctrines meant that Muslims kept themselves distinct from Hindus (most of the time). Ordinary people in India have been aware of differences between Hindu and Muslim for many centuries. By contrast, pan-Dravidianism only emerged from relatively recent linguistic analysis. During most of Indian history, people knew something about the language they spoke and the languages their immediate neighbors spoke, but generally didn't know or care too much about higher-level linguistic groupings. The main thing that modern Dravidian-speakers have united around, as far as I'm aware, is opposing plans to drop English as a national language of India, which would leave Hindi as the sole national language. The article that you linked to explains that Pan-Dravidianism didn't get too far as a political movement because other Dravidian-speakers thought it was a cover for Tamil domination. AnonMoos (talk) 02:45, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Gotcha! That makes sense! So, there wasn't really that much to rally the different Dravidian-speakers in India around, eh? No fears among Dravidians that Indo-Aryans were going to oppress them and whatnot, et cetera. Futurist110 (talk) 03:11, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

According to the prevalent (but not universally accepted) theories about the Indo-European migrations into the sub-continent, such oppression did happen – beginning thousands of years ago, before written records: the Vedic scriptures are later transcriptions of the oral traditions passed down from that iron age Vedic period, comparable to Hesiod and Homer's accounts of Bronze Age Greece. By the time we get into reliable recorded history, the Indo-Aryan peoples had already come to a degree of domination over the earlier established Dravidians via conquest (see the Maurya Empire) and culture with the developing Caste system which, by the time India began to transition from a huge patchwork of independent states towards greater unity under the influence of more recent invaders (e.g. the Mughals and the British, was so ingrained that few questioned it.

Note that this is an over-simplified, and in places doubtless misleading, overview by someone external to the cultures concerned about an extremely wide subject. You might usefully devote some time (days or weeks) to reading the article History of India and following up its many links. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.56.237 (talk) 11:26, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Seeking identity of artist

Several years ago I saw a YouTube video of a TED Talk (or so I recall) by a female artist who made kinetic picture frames where simple silhouette figures ran around a track built into the frame. For some, the figures would appear to interact with each other; for others, they would interact with the observer -- I recall one in particular with a proximity sensor where "shy" figures would move about, exploring the frame, until an observer approached when they would scoot out of view into the sides of the frame. Does this ring a bell with anyone here? I just searched Google and YouTube for about an hour to no avail. -- ToE 01:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I Googled videos for figures interacting exploring frame ted and it came up with this. The thing you refer to starts at around the 7:15 mark. --Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that's it! Ms. Aparna Rao. (Not the German anthropologist of the same name.)

Aparna Rao's TED Speaker page.

Her studio: Pors & Rao.

Thanks, Shantavira! You're my hero! -- ToE 16:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Mariupol and Donbass War question

Why do you think that the Donbass separatists never conquered Mariupol during the Donbass War? Futurist110 (talk) 03:12, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

We're not here to tell people what we think. We provide references to published material, which in general will tell you what those authors think. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

OK; so, can this please be done in this specific case? Thank you. Futurist110 (talk) 07:24, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Futurist110, this conflict is still ongoing, so it's premature to talk in terms of x outcome "never happening." More generally, the answer to many such diverse questions of yours (with which you bombard the Desks daily), is for you to read into the given subject more deeply. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.56.237 (talk) 11:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I take it that you've read Battle of Mariupol (May–June 2014) and Offensive on Mariupol (September 2014)? Alansplodge (talk) 12:16, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Yep. Futurist110 (talk) 22:38, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Louisiana Congress?

Is it correct to refer to Louisianas State House and State Senate as "Congress"? Or is it only one Congress in the United States? Geschichte (talk) 14:46, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I think it would be more common to refer to the combination of House and Senate as the Louisiana State Legislature, but here you can see in the same paragraph both "Louisiana Legislature" and "Louisiana Congress" being used. This document with a plan for a high-school history lesson also refers to the legislature in joint session during the Governor's State of the State address as "the Louisiana Congress". While I hate to say that they are incorrect, such references are rare and may not be understood. Wiktionary gives this sense for the term congress: "(often capitalized: Congress) A legislative body of a state, originally the bicameral legislature of the United States of America." Just "Congress", with a capital latter and no attribute, is defined only at the federal level.  --Lambiam 16:30, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I don’t know about Louisiana (except that our article is called Louisiana State Legislature), but in other states it’s usually not called “congress”. In Illinois, for example, it’s the “General Assembly”, while the houses are the Illinois House of Representatives and Illinois Senate. As Lambiam indicates, “Congress” on its own means the federal legislature. I’d also assume someone just saying “the House” or “the Senate” was referring to the federal bodies. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 17:18, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Also in everyday speech—to the extent people even have everyday conversations about their state legislatures—they’d usually refer to it as “the state legislature,” or where applicable “the general assembly” or (e.g., in MA, NH) “the general court”. Or they might refer to the whole state government collectively by the capital (e.g., “Representatives in Springfield opened the new legislative session on Monday.”). While I would understand the phrase “state Congress” or “Illinois Congress” I would personally consider it incorrect and probably correct whoever said it. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 19:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Does the law ever deter a serial killer from starting in the first place?

On TV they can't resist their urge forever, is this just an artificial effect of TV only showing biographies if they're impulsive and/or ballsy and/or legally insane and/or evil enough to technically become a serial killer? And if any have enough willpower to not "graduate" to humans is it always the illegally torturing and killing animals cliche or are there humans who would start serial killing in a heartbeat if some genie made them uncatchable but they have enough cautiousness and self-control to stay inside the law of advanced democracies forever? Presumably they would blend in with troops, slaughtererhousemen or maybe executioners so they could kill and watch or masturbate to legal content at home? Like their favorite horror movies. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Temerarius (talk) 21:46, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Yep. Just answering the question in the title, didn't even bother to read the rest of whatever you've made up. Nanonic (talk) 01:34, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Probably, but deterrence isn’t the sole, or necessarily even the primary goal of the criminalization of murder. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 02:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Right. The purpose is to remove them from society. (In the case of capital punishment, the removal is permanent.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:29, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

The canonical justifications for criminal liability are retribution (that wrongdoers get their just deserts, and thus there is no need for feuding/vigilantism), deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. In modern criminal justice these are all at play, which is something a lot of people regrettably miss. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 06:04, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Regardless of the various emotional justifications, the practical side is that it removes them from society, at least for a while. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:44, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

There are indeed ways to channel ones perversions into something useful to society. In the verbal intro to one of his songs, Tom Lehrer spoke of a friend of his who wrote a "heartwarming" novel about a young necrophiliac who finally achieves his lifelong ambition by becoming coroner. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:29, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

December 31

Amputation that is indirectly necessary in order to save one's life--question about the law

If someone saves someone from a fire that would have otherwise killed them, but has to amputate a part of their body in order to free them so that they could indeed save them and evacuate them, would this person owe anything to the other person later on for amputating a part of their body?

Also, would it depend on whether or not this amputation was consensual--even if this amputation was indirectly necessary in order to save this person's life in any case?

As for owing this other person something, I mean something like owing them financial compensation for amputation them even if this was literally the only way that their life could be saved from this fire.

FWIW, I'm not asking for opinion about this so much as about if there were any relevant legal cases and/or precedents in regards to this. Futurist110 (talk) 08:45, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

A good place to start could be Good Samaritan law. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

So all of this assuming you're talking about the US - The good samaritan laws themselves are statutory codifications of the typically much weaker common law rule on good samaritans. As described by the California Supreme Court, a person who undertakes to rescue another where no prior duty existed "is under a duty to exercise due care in performance and is liable if (a) his failure to exercise such care increases the risk of such harm, or (b) the harm is suffered because of the other's reliance upon the undertaking." The actual good samaritan statutes vary by state but a typical one will shield from liability both medical and non-medical life-saving measures, while exempting from this shield acts of gross negligence, unnecessary intervention, and other stupidity. In your given hypothetical of a life-threatening situation in which the choices for the victim are A) Death; and B) immediate amputation by this dude who is here now using this particular procedure; there is obvious immunity under the common law rule alone, as the victim's losses were only reduced. However, whether A and B were true may be debated after the fact. For instance the danger facing the victim may be subject to factual dispute, as may be the necessity of the samaritan's particular actions, or the necessity that the samaritan be the one to perform them. If there is room to dispute any of these things you're looking at a state law issue. When emergency amputations have to be performed, for instance to extract a victim of a building collapse, it is almost universally the case that consent is first obtained, and some form of licensed medical provider is present, an EMT at least, to perform the procedure. In that case liability protection would be provided under the conditions of other state laws. Someguy1221 (talk) 11:19, 31 December 2020 (UTC)