Miscellaneous desk
< January 1	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 3 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 2

Bakery scene in movie

For me, the bakery scene is an iconic scene in the movie (Once Upon a Time in America). There are cakes of all kinds; for example, could the cakes have looked like cakes for religious or personal holidays, or both? Thanks. https://www.google.it/search?client=safari&sca_esv=594974358&channel=iphone_bm&sxsrf=AM9HkKmDYhxHmeq2qQWr2DMk9ja84P8t7w:1704154931805&q=once+upon+a+time+in+america+birthday+cakes&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjNyOjqt72DAxUkcvEDHSEND58Q0pQJegQICRAB&biw=1964&bih=965&dpr=0.9#imgrc=PasuH-dw4lcXkM 5.95.197.140 (talk) 00:25, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They just look like everyday cupcakes to me, but the very first link returned when I follow your search query has details about the dessert, which it calls a "charlotte russe cake". Matt Deres (talk) 17:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this works as well: https://www.google.it/search?q=once+upon+a+time+in+america+birthday+cakes&tbm=isch —Tamfang (talk) 21:46, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can see better from here; they also look like cakes for personal occasions for example, like what do I know like birthdays or other holidays. It may be perhaps... https://www.google.it/search?client=safari&sca_esv=595140811&channel=iphone_bm&sxsrf=AM9HkKllhzShClOjHtOYaonno2cnNAmJOg:1704221727551&q=once+upon+a+time+in+america+bakery+scene&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjKlMHVsL-DAxUdW_EDHWsXDMQQ0pQJegQICRAB&biw=1964&bih=965&dpr=0.9#imgrc=m6AxfRtpodcRYM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.95.197.140 (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What sets cakes for personal occasions apart from other cakes is that they have a text written on them that is appropriate for the occasion. The first two cakes on raised platforms seen in the GIF are large enough that someone could order one to be decorated with "Happy Birthday" lettering or some other congratulatory message. The specific cakes seen are, however, already decorated in ways that may make it challenging to add a text. As we only have a view from the side, that is not something that can be made out. --Lambiam 00:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

True, we have a partial and suboptimal view; probably writing (and even candles) were not yet in use at that time, so it could be possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.95.197.140 (talk) 09:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The tradition of having text written on cakes and of putting candles on birthday cakes is older.^[1][2][3] Obviously, custom text needs to be ordered in advance; cakes with custom text will not be on display in the vitrine of a pastry shop. --Lambiam 12:57, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with naming convention

Eleusinian Mysteries Hydria (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

@Choliamb and UndercoverClassicist: The editor who created this article meant well, but I don't think the title really works. Please help me come up with a new title for this 1883 archaeological discovery. It's a 4th century BCE hydria that was found in Capua, now held by the Museum of Fine Arts of Lyon. Link to LIMC and museum collection. How should an article about the object be named on Wikipedia? Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 05:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Titles can be a tricky business in articles like this. What problem with the existing title were you looking to solve?

A couple of thoughts:

Italic titles should only be used for works of art that have definitive, agreed-upon titles (e.g. Great Expectations or "The Iliad", not for titles of convenience or descriptions (e.g. Aineta aryballos, Persian Rider.) Admittedly, the line is thin when we're talking about classical works, but in this case there's definitely no universally-used name, so the italics should go.
As to what the title should be: the overarching guideline is WP:COMMONNAME, which says to use the name by which that thing is generally known to our audience, but I don't think that's much help here; scanning through the sources, the object is generally described rather than named. MOS:TITLE gives five goals: recognisability, naturalness, precision, concision and consistency.
Honestly, I think the current title is fine for all of those: it isn't wonderfully precise, and there isn't a consistent style between similar articles (compare Three-Bodied Daemon (ACMA 35) vs. Euthydikos Kore vs. Kore 670). To answer the main question in your post, there isn't any specific guideline or house style as to how articles on objects like these should be titled: it's very much writer's preference, and in most cases we defer to that when there's no clear "right" answer (compare MOS:ERA, MOS:RETAIN etc.).
Another option would be to use a museum-number title, as with the so-called Three-Bodied Daemon, but I'm not generally a fan of those -- they improve precision but at the expense of all four of the other goals, and I don't think that's usually a good trade. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 09:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The museum itself uses the title "Hydrie des Mystères d'Éleusis" in French, and "Hydria featuring the Eleusinian Mysteries" in English.^[4][5] Especially the latter makes clear this designation is not a proper noun. This is not the only hydria featuring the Eleusinian cult that has been found: here we find:

48a. Gods around the omphalos of Eleusis, on an Attic hydria from Crete. Athens, National Museum. Pp: DAI, Athens. 160
...
49a/ 49b. Gods at the omphalos of Eleusis, on an Attic hydria from Santa Maria in Capua Vetere. Lyons, Palais des Arts. 161

The hydria from Crete is probably the one depicted here. An unambiguous name for the article is "Hydria from Capua featuring the Eleusinian Mysteries". --Lambiam 10:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest that name fails the concision test, and that ambiguity is only in play if there are other Wikipedia articles with which it might be confused. As an example, we have e.g. Alan Wace, not Alan Wace (archaeologist), because while there have undoubtedly been other people by that name, none of them yet have an article. Is there another Wikipedia article that someone might reasonably be expecting when searching for "Eleusinian Mysteries Hydria"? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 11:41, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they might be expecting an article on Eleusinian Mysteries hydriae in general, or one on the Cretan Eleusinian Mysteries hydria. --Lambiam 12:42, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to ping, but with the caution that I am not a regular contributor to Wikipedia, I have never written or named a new article, and I know nothing of WP naming conventions. For what it's worth, my opinion is that some disambiguation would be a good thing here. As User:Lambiam points out, there is another similar Kerch-style hydria in Athens, National Museum 1443, from Crete, that is frequently cited in discussions of Eleusinian iconography. I usually turn first to Kevin Clinton for any epigraphical or iconographical questions about Eleusis, and in Myth and Cult: The Iconography of the Eleusinian Mysteries), he refers to them as "the Athens hydria" and "the Lyons hydria". I agree that "Hydria from Capua featuring the Eleusinian Mysteries" is not very concise (although, as a non-Wikipedia person, I don't understand why that would be a serious problem, since you can create any number of more concise redirects, right?). In any case, if brevity is paramount, perhaps something like "Eleusinian Mysteries Hydria in Lyons" or "Lyons Eleusinian Mysteries Hydria" would be an acceptable compromise? That's all I have to offer, and in the case of disagreement I defer to UndercoverClassicist, whose understanding of what WP wants is far greater than mine. Cheers, Choliamb (talk) 16:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to put it on record, I think everything here is very sensible and I'd have no major objection to any of the titles proposed. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, whatever article name is chosen, "hydria" should be spelled with a lower-case "h" unless it is the first word of the name. --Lambiam 23:49, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you everyone for your input. I must say, I was surprised to learn that there is no uniform naming convention for archaeological objects. Viriditas (talk) 22:30, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only a few years ago the world learned, to its horror, that there was no uniform naming convention for large objects that revolved around stars. They fixed that, but their solution hasn't pleased everyone. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:51, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are two major hurdles. To make a catalogue of archaeological objects that can meaningfully be consulted, the objects have to be described as belonging to categories. But many have not been studied sufficiently to assign categories to them; they are stuffed in boxes stowed in cellars or attics of musea, waiting to be examined. If they have been studied, the applicable categories are often unclear; different theories may exist and insights are changing continually. Experts may even have different opinions on whether some categories are even meaningful. A more practical hurdle is the sheer volume. Just the National Archaeological Museum, France, is estimated to hold about 3 million archaeological objects. The British Museum announced in 2023 that it had recorded 1.5 million archaeological objects unearthed by the public.^[6] These were found before March 2020; there is a huge backlog. --Lambiam 19:12, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia appears to have the same problem Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute. 31.113.52.197 (talk) 19:48, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have they considered outsourcing the problem to outside expert team leaders who can work with students and others, such as those participating in voluntourism? Viriditas (talk) 20:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who are "they"? UNESCO? The International Council of Museums? The World Archaeological Congress? --Lambiam 22:55, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ~60 person staff of the Portable Antiquities Scheme. It look like they designed the database conventions with the input of participating members of the archaeological community. Viriditas (talk) 23:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The PAS works with a network of volunteers^[7] mentored by local Finds Liaison Officers.^[8] --Lambiam 09:44, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]