Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
Select a section:
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.

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:

May 25[edit]

A city containing a city?[edit]

Is it right to say that Delhi (the National Capital Territory, NCT) contains Delhi (a city), which contains New Delhi (also a city)? Do each of these areas have a different mayor/governor?

Would that be the same case with London containing the City of London?

Does this happen anywhere else on the world? Bumptump (talk) 15:28, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Like New York City and New York State, there are multiple entities named "Delhi". As of the recent 2022 reorganization, The NCT of Delhi is composed of three municipalities (cities), known as the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (the city of Delhi), the Delhi Cantonment and New Delhi Municipal Council, which governs New Delhi itself. So New Delhi is part of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, but not part of the City of Delhi. Shelly Oberoi is the head of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and serves as Mayor of the city of Delhi, while New Delhi doesn't have a mayor, the municipal council has a chairperson, who is not popularly elected. The Government of Delhi governs the NCT, and like many Westminster-system based places, has a split executive consisting of an elected Chief minister, Arvind Kejriwal, and a appointed and mostly ceremonial lieutenant governor, Vinai Kumar Saxena. Regarding the "city of London" and "London", the City of London is really a sui generis legal entity with legal powers and organization dating back to time immemorial; no one really knows how old it is; William the Conqueror granted a charter that merely confirmed its existing rights, having existed even then back to a time beyond which anyone could remember; the site of the Roman Londinium was essentially abandoned by the end of the 5th century, but the walls mostly remained, defining what would become the City of London, which was formally re-established in the 9th century by Alfred the Great (see Anglo-Saxon London). Though many of the Anglo-Saxon kings had used Winchester as their seat, London had the right to crown the King; one really couldn't claim the right to be considered King of all of the English unless one were crowned in London (meaning what we now know as the City of London). What we today call London is really Greater London, and explicitly does not contain the City of London, which is surrounded by Greater London, but is entirely independent of it, as it has been for more than a millenium. The city of London has the Lord Mayor of London, who is elected through an arcane election procedure that dates back to 1189. The Mayor of London governs the city of Greater London, and only dates to 2000, when the office became the first directly-popularly-elected municipal chief executive in Britain at the time. This video from CGP Grey explains the City of London/Greater London relationship. In some states of the U.S., where there are multilayered administrative divisions (state-county-township-municipality) there are places where there are townships and cities that have the same name and lie next to each other (and which the Post Office treats as one postal city) but which exist as distinct municipalities, see for example Plattsburgh, New York and Plattsburgh (town), New York. --Jayron32 16:49, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, I popped in to bring up the insane example of New York towns, but there's a few other weirdnesses in the US that I can share. Virginia has an arcane system where cities can be independent of counties, so we get a situation where Fairfax is politically outside of Fairfax County, but is still the county seat of the county. But then there's the simpler issue of towns completely surrounding others, like how Beverly Hills and West Hollywood are bordered only by each other and Los Angeles, or any other of the many situations where a large city surrounds a smaller one. An interesting one near to me is tiny University Heights, Iowa, which is completely surrounded by Iowa City, but contains the main roads to the University of Iowa football stadium, and so is purportedly funded almost entirely by speed traps set up on that road on game days. --Golbez (talk) 17:20, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I read the OP's use of containing meaning "is a lower on the administrative hierarchy than" rather than "is an enclave within", and answered on that basis. Neither New Delhi or the City of London is part of their surrounding municipalities, but each are part of higher order administrative divisions (the NCT and England, respectively). Delhi gets confusing because it is the common name of two distinct entities, one on the same level of the "org chart" as New Delhi, and one a level higher. It is part of the "Union Territory of Delhi" but not of the "City of Delhi", though in common speech both uses of Delhi may be used somewhat interchangeably and confusingly so at times. --Jayron32 18:09, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Taipei, Taiwan, is wholly surrounded by New Taipei City. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 17:28, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not familiar with local government in the U S, but before the 1974 reorganisation there were "county boroughs" which governed themselves and were administratively independent of the geographical counties they were in. And of course, the town of Berwick in Northumberland is across the Tweed and thus in a different country from Berwickshire. Although Jayron says

What we today call London is really Greater London, and explicitly does not contain the City of London, which is surrounded by Greater London, but is entirely independent of it

the City of London has representation on the London Assembly, which is the democratic arm of the Greater London Authority. To clarify that, the administrative units within Greater London are the 32 Greater London boroughs and the City of London. 2A00:23C3:9900:9401:ECC5:8A57:B434:4E93 (talk) 18:21, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The GLA has representation from the City of London, but does not have authority over it. The representative for the city is not distinct to the city, but represents the City and East constituency. The GLA doesn't really even have authority over the 32 boroughs; statutory power over the boroughs lies primarily with the borough councils, which manage all of the normal municipal affairs of the individual boroughs. The GLA really only manages and handles the budget for "Greater London" as a whole, and in doing so, as noted in that article, "It is a strategic regional authority, with powers over transport, policing, economic development, and fire and emergency planning." And of those, the only one it really handles that also covers the City of London is transport. The City of London Police is independent of the GLA, which manages the Metropolitan Police, which does not have jurisdiction over the City of London. Neither does the GLA manage "economic development" for the City, that's the express and exclusive responsibility of the City of London Corporation. A good summary of the role of the boroughs in governance of London is in this video by Jay Foreman, which really shows that Greater London really mostly operates as 32 mostly-independent cities, with everything from trash pick up, to building permitting, to paving the streets, etc. is the exclusive purview of the borough councils. The Mayor and the London Assembly is largely only responsible for regional planning and boosterism for the whole region, and its role is largely advisory. --Jayron32 19:09, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The City of London has no direct control of the fire service, public transport and traffic initiatives like the London congestion charge and the Ultra Low Emission Zone, all of which are in the perview of the Mayor of London, whom the City can only influence through the Greater London Authority. Alansplodge (talk) 11:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Considering driving into the City of London involves paying the charge at an impervious boundary that the City of London has nothing to do with, I'm not sure that matters much. But I take your point. However, you'll note that I said "the only one it really handles that also covers the City of London is transport", which I'm sure was confusing, so what I really meant there was "the only one it really handles that also covers the City of London is transport". I hope that clarifies things. Your point on fire services is valid, and one I missed, however. --Jayron32 11:32, 26 May 2023 (UTC)>Reply[reply]

Two things about Jayron's videolink: the City's armorial supporters are not "small dragons": they are griffins. The Vatican City, while popularly known as "Rome", is of course an independent country. 2A00:23C3:9900:9401:ECC5:8A57:B434:4E93 (talk) 18:33, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

They are not. Coat of arms of the City of London notes, correctly I might add, with references, that they are dragons. CGP Grey may have his flaws, but insufficiently researched is not one of them. Those are dragons. --Jayron32 19:15, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, St George and the Griffin is not a well-known legend. Alansplodge (talk) 11:13, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe there's a separate tale about George's favorite boot polish. One major difference is that a griffin has a lion-like body, while a dragon has a reptile-like body. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:51, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is a city in London that is not the City of London. DuncanHill (talk) 11:36, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Certainly the City of London is different to the 32 London boroughs, but while there is more ceremony attached I wouldn't say it has more powers than the boroughs. In fact things have gone the other way - from 1971 the Mayor's and City of London Court has been nothing more than a county court. The Inner and Middle Temples fall within the boundary of the City of London but it has very little jurisdiction over them. The original Metropolitan boroughs, dating from 1900, acquired the powers of the parish vestries, and their boundaries were coterminous with those of the parishes. As regards the heraldic aspects, you can add "winged lions" to the mix [1]. This informative piece also explains the origin of the phrase "bull in a china shop." 2A00:23C3:9900:9401:B9A0:FA15:D4C5:303F (talk) 13:56, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More: Santa Monica, Beverley Hills, and City of Commerce are all wholly contained within Los Angeles City.DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 22:24, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, @User:Jayron32, I understand your concern to draw attention to the special status of the City of London, but it is incorrect to say that the City of London is not part of Greater London. This is laid down in statute law, the London Government Act 1963 §2(1), "The area comprising the areas of the London boroughs, the City and the Temples shall constitute an administrative area to be known as Greater London." I don't think it could possibly be clearer. Perhaps you were thinking of the fact that the City of London is not one of the London boroughs, as it is not listed in Schedule 1? The Act preserves some of the different powers and structure of the City, but it also makes a distinction (now largely meaningless) between inner and outer London, and no one would argue that this excludes Hackney or Harrow from Greater London. Matt's talk 08:29, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fair enough; I appreciate the correction! --Jayron32 11:07, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The City of Piedmont, California is totally enclosed by the City of Oakland, California, but they are separate cities, just as the City of Industry, while enclosed by the City of Los Angeles, is not part of that city. Piedmont and Oakland are both within Alameda County (as is the also-distinct City of Alameda, California), while Los Angeles and the cities she surrounds are within Los Angeles County.
A roughly similar situation appears to apply to Quezon City in the Philippines: both Quezon City and the City of Manila lie within Metro Manila.
Mexico seems a little more complicated. Mexico City (México D.F. for Distrito Federal) is not part of the State of Mexico, just as Washington, D.C. (District of Columbia) is not part of Virginia or Maryland. But Greater Mexico City does include México, D.F., as well as parts of the states of Mexico and Hidalgo.
But although I've lived in California and studied her politics, I'm certainly no expert on Mexico or the Philippines, so I welcome any corrections, explanations or elucidations. —— Shakescene (talk) 05:18, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The city of Detroit completely surrounds the smaller cities of Hamtramck and Highland Park, Michigan. Cullen328 (talk) 20:23, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Buenos Aires (disambiguation) lists a similar situation in Argentina. --Error (talk) 08:55, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Llandaff is wholly contained within the City of Cardiff, Wales. It has its own bishop and cathedral and is popularly thought of as a city within a city: but it was never chartered and sadly doesn't attract official city status in the United Kingdom. MinorProphet (talk) 12:55, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Reverse" of the criterion of embarrassment[edit]

Is there a term for a "reverse" application of the criterion of embarrassment, i.e. that if someone says something complimentary about their enemy, it's likely to be true? Lazar Taxon (talk) 17:26, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is unclear (to me) why complimenting an enemy might be related to embarrassment. Opposing generals have been known to admire the enemy's tactics, for example. Be that as it may, the opposite of embarrassment is pride. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 17:30, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is referring to the "criterion of embarrassment" rather than "embarrassment." The criterion of embarrassment means that if a person were to record something very embarrassing about their past experience, it is likely true because the person has no reason to keep a record of such an event. It is primarily used in Biblical academics. The opposite would be a person who did not record something very non-embarrassing about their past experience. I would consider that humility, letting someone else make a record of it. (talk) 17:43, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My use of "reverse" is probably a little unclear, but I'm asking if there's a name for the idea that a good thing said about one's opponent is likely to be true, in the same way that a bad thing said about oneself is likely to be true. Lazar Taxon (talk) 18:16, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't know if there is a term for this criterion, or even if it is a plausible criterion, but something I have observed several times may be related, namely that a political attack on a person often begins by saying something complimentary about them. ("Doofus T. Mudfuddle does his job with admirable energy and dedication. Unfortunately, hia results are less admirable. In fact, they are distressing. ...").  --Lambiam 22:22, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Praise sandwich --Error (talk) 08:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The criterion of embarrassment loses its power as a criterion of authenticity when an author is aware of the possible application of the criterion to their writings. They may then choose to wrap a falsehood they want to be accepted as true in an embarrassing narrative, accepting the embarrassment as a minor cost in achieving a more important objective. A similar consideration holds for the complementary criterion, so in applying it one should always be aware of the possibility of an ulterior motive. The criterion may not have a name for lack of passages to which it may be applied. Are there, for instance, passages in the New Testament that are complimentary for adversaries of Christianity?  --Lambiam 10:25, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

what is the[edit]

difference between mortgage insurance and home insurance ? 2601:482:4280:C3B0:6DA5:C63C:79DC:B94E (talk) 19:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mortgage insurance will pay some or all of the mortgage should certain things happen: death, severe illness, redundancy etc. Home insurance will recompense you for the damage if your house is flooded, burnt down or collapses etc. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 19:13, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed, but:
The key difference between mortgage insurance and home insurance is who it financially protects. Homeowners insurance mainly protects the borrower’s investment, while mortgage insurance protects the lender’s investment in your home.
Mortgage insurance vs. home insurance: what’s the difference?
Alansplodge (talk) 20:38, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are Turkish marketplace and neighbourhood guards (Çarşı ve mahalle bekçileri) the same unit as night eagles (gece kartalları)?[edit]

Thanks. Apokrif (talk) 22:59, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gece kartalları is an informal name for what are more formally called çarşı ve mahalle bekçileri.[2]  --Lambiam 22:07, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May 26[edit]

Halide Edib Adıvar and Gandhism[edit]

I was reviewing DYK for Zakir Husain where in Turkish activist Halide Edib Adıvar is seen speaking about Gandhism. Where as there seems to be some questions over her role vis a vis Armenians.

My questions are

  • 1) What is time line of her exposure to Gandhism?
  • 2) How far she was influenced by Gandhism specially principle of non-violence?
  • 3) Did she review or change any of her positions in light of her improved understanding of Gandhism?
  • 4) Did she critiqued any one / thing through lenses of Gandhism?
  • 5) How far her visits to India influenced Indian political leadership (Congress and non-Congress) with her political thoughts? Bookku (talk) 04:55, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Googling "Halide Edib Adıvar gandhi" turns up oodles of sources. You're likely to find a lot of work here you could use to expand her article easily. See [3]. --Jayron32 11:41, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh that's interesting. thanks. Bookku (talk) 12:17, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Spanish exploration of the Pacific[edit]

This map, produced in 1830, seeks to depict the world as it was known in 1660; unexplored areas are covered with black clouds. I'm surprised to see the Pacific Ocean so marked, since Magellan had crossed it a century earlier, but who knows, that's an isolated voyage that might be forgotten about. But my biggest question -- in the 17th century, how did Spanish expeditions to the Philippines typically travel? Given Portuguese dominance of the Indian Ocean (plus the uselessness of the region to the Spanish, thanks to Tordesillas), I figured they would routinely cross the Pacific and rely on either the Straits of Magellan or an overland crossing in Central America, but if Spanish expeditions to the Philippines had been crossing the Pacific routinely for a century (per History of the Philippines (1565-1898), the Spanish presence began in 1565), I don't understand the mapmakers' decision here. Nyttend (talk) 21:42, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Via Mexico. "On November 19 or 20, 1564, a Spanish expedition of a mere 500 men led by Miguel López de Legazpi departed Barra de Navidad (modern Mexican state of Jalisco) in the Viceroyalty of New Spain, arriving off Cebu on February 13, 1565, conquering it despite Cebuano opposition." History of the Philippines. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 22:30, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nyttend -- We have an article Manila galleon on the ships that for many years carried Mexican silver to the Philippines, and brought spices and Chinese luxuries back. However, until the mid eighteenth century, there were a number of Pacific islands undiscovered by Europeans, and blank areas on the map where there could have been land... AnonMoos (talk) 04:38, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What the Spanish galleons traveling between Manila in the Phillipines and Acapulco in Mexico did not discover is really quite remarkable. Their transpacific voyages began in 1565, and for well over 200 years, their ships sailed every year eastbound to Mexico passing north of Hawaii, and westbound to the Phillipines passing south of Hawaii. It was not until 1778 that James Cook stumbled on Hawaii and got killed there. That is a span of time equivalent to the period from the Napoleonic Wars until today, and the Spanish never discovered Hawaii, stretched out prominently and proud in the middle of the Pacific. Really quite strange. Cullen328 (talk) 07:34, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Part of it can be explained. To sail eastbound, they had to catch the westerlies, putting them at least 1000 km north of the main Hawaiian islands. When sailing westbound, the longitude problem made it most attractive to do so at the latitude of the Philippines, putting them 600 km south of Hawaii. The highest peak there, Mauna Kea, can at best be seen from about 250 km away; the small islands in the north-west of the chain only from a few tens of kilometres. The remarkable thing is that they didn't systematically explore the part of the Pacific that they routinely crossed anyway. Maybe because they had a known, safe route and any deviation from it would increase the chance of shipwreck. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:21, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See Álvaro de Mendaña de Neira for Spanish non-Philippines exploring efforts. AnonMoos (talk) 12:06, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On the mapmakers' decision here, this is a plate from Edward Quinn's Atlas in a Series of Maps of the World as Known at Different Periods, with an Historical Narrative (in case you didn't see) which also contains Quinn's narrative, mostly concerned with European affairs and little exploration. You can see the Philippines listed in the initial description of the "Eighteenth Period" (1558-1660), but the narrative discussion for Spain is very brief and doesn't really list discoveries. The preface might have some hints as to his intent and level of detail in the maps.
The Sandwich Islands are on the map however as "Isles de la Mesa", i think this is a misunderstanding of some sighting or rumor from Mendaña's first voyage AnonMoos linked to. Juan Gaetano[4] Manila galleon#Possible contact with Hawaii fiveby(zero) 14:07, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
After the death of Magellan, his expedition split. Juan Sebastián Elcano took the Victoria (ship) through the Portuguese half of the world painfully avoiding the Portuguese and circumnavigating the world for the first time. Trinidad (ship) leaked so she could not join Victoria. They tried to sail back to the Americas but couldn't find the Westerlies and ended surrendering to the Portuguese. It would take Andrés de Urdaneta to find the tornaviaje to commercially exploit the Manila Galleon.
Spanish immigration to Hawaii says:
Hawaiian historians, such as Reginald Yzendoorn and Richard W. Rogers, defended the possibility of the first European discovery of the Hawaiian Islands by Spain, especially by the Spanish sailor Juan Gaetano, since several 16th-century documents and maps detailed islands in the same geographical position that received the name: "La Mesa" in the case of Hawaii, "La Desgraciada" to refer to Maui, "Ulloa" to Kahoʻolawe, and "Los Monges" to Lanai and Molokai. In addition, other logbooks, such as those of the corvettes Descubierta and Atrevida, make these islands coincide at the same point in the Pacific Ocean. Likewise, geographers who had access to privileged information about the Spanish expeditions, such as Abraham Ortelius, did not fail to locate islands called “Los Bolcanes” and “La Farfana” at those same coordinates.[1][2][3][4]
  1. ^ Richard W. Rogers, Shipwrecks of Hawaii: A Maritime History of the Big Island, 1999, Pilialoha Press
  2. ^ Statewide County HI Archives News.....Spaniards in Hawai'i - Part 1. August 25, 2008
  3. ^ "Un naufragio pone en evidencia la historia oficial de los viajes de Cook". ABC. 29 September 2013.
  4. ^ "¿Descubrieron los españoles Hawái?". El Plural. 28 November 2019.
--Error (talk) 09:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May 27[edit]

Holiday on Chinese calendar for May 26, 2023[edit]

For May 26, 2023, my Chinese calendar shows that it is some sort of holiday, apparently some sort of Buddhist holiday. What holiday is it? 2601:18A:C500:E830:74AD:BE2A:E86B:2C54 (talk) 02:58, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possibly Vesak, though it's a little late. Our article doesn't seem to include a Chinese date for 2023. Shantavira|feed me 09:12, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is it possible for you to upload a screenshot of the page? You're enquiring from Massachussetts - does it have a significant Jewish community? I don't know where your calendar was printed, but yesterday and today is the observance of the Feast of Weeks (yesterday only in Israel). (talk) 10:07, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It was Buddha's birthday, which is a public holiday in Hong Kong. Matt's talk 12:02, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How does Vesak differ from Buddha's Birthday? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:34, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Buddha's birthday is what it says (though he wasn't yet a Buddha). Vesak is the anniversary of the Buddha's Enlightenment. Shantavira|feed me 13:46, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Vesak article says "Also called Buddha's Birthday". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:50, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's discussed in the lead of our article.... Matt's talk 14:53, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And there is contradictory info in the Vesak article. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:16, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In Indonesia, Vesak is observed at the full moon about a week from now. It appears that, unlike the Chinese calendar, the Buddhist calendar is not uniform. Some countries use the metonic cycle, some don't. The original version of Buddhist calendar stated "all years are elapsed/expired/complete years, thus their epochal year is year 0, not year 1, because a complete year has not elapsed during it." As the current version notes a discrepancy in epoch between 545 BC and 544 BC it might be an idea to put that information back in. An edit by @Hybernator: on 14 April 2013 (maybe to mark the new year) claims "In Myanmar, the difference between BE and CE can be 543 or 544 for CE dates, and 544 or 543 for BCE dates." This is wrong on the face of it, because the ranges are identical, and since our article Burmese calendar says the country doesn't use the Buddhist era I don't feel qualified to correct it. Perhaps someone with expertise could take a look? (talk) 16:31, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why is that wrong? The traditional lunisolar calendars of South, South-East Asia all straddle the Gregorian year. Per the Burmese calendar, the current ME year 1385 (Burmese Buddhist year 2567) spans from 17 April 2023 to 16 April 2024. So, the difference between 2567 and 2023/2024 is 544 or 543.
And the Burmese Buddhist calendar is still widely used in Myanmar. And what does that have to do with the Buddhist calendar straddling the Gregorian calendar 543 or 544 years apart!??? Hybernator (talk) 00:06, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I think that "Buddha's birthday" is the right answer.
I'm the one who posted the original question. The lunar date (4/8) looks right, and the Chinese characters in the article look like what I remember seeing on my calendar. 2601:18A:C500:E830:5FE1:FAD1:4C23:CABD (talk) 21:36, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So is Vesak also considered to be "Buddha's Birthday"? Or not? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:30, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In Myanmar, Vesak/full moon of Kason is celebrated as the Buddha's birthday. This year, it fell on 26 May 2023. Hybernator (talk) 00:10, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That makes things nice and confusing. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:53, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Commonwealth countries celebrate the monarch's birthday mostly in June but on other dates in some places. And there's usually a public holiday and official honours announced. But their actual birthday is not then. Charles III was born on 14 November, Elizabeth II on 21 April, George VI on 14 December .... We deal with it pretty well. (Also, I doubt the actual date of Buddha's birth was recorded or has survived, so they have to make do.) -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 21:08, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It has to do with how much time has passed. As I sometimes say, the birth of Muhammad is known within a year or two, and his death date is known to the day, while the birth and death dates of Jesus are known to within a few years, but it's disputed as to which century Buddha lived in, and disputed as to which millennium Zoroaster lived in. AnonMoos (talk) 02:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I should have added more context: Vesak isn't celebrated only as his birthday. At least in Burmese Buddhist tradition (and probably all Theravada traditions), the Buddha was born, achieved enlightenment, and died on the full moon day of Kason / Vaiśākha. Hybernator (talk) 18:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Definition of North and South Atlantic[edit]

I was surprised to learn that the IHO defines the two parts of the Atlantic Ocean using the Equator, resulting in a little wedge of the North Atlantic extending underneath the Gulf of Guinea. Is this definition universal, or do some authorities use a (seemingly) more natural boundary like this one? Lazar Taxon (talk) 16:29, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Our article Atlantic Ocean claims "The Atlantic Ocean is divided in two parts, by the Equatorial Counter Current, with the North(ern) Atlantic Ocean and the South(ern) Atlantic Ocean split at about 8°N." citing an archived US Navy webpage. DuncanHill (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This chart shows a west-to-east "Guinea Current", in the Gulf of Guinea well below 8°N, and an east-to-west "Equatorial Current", separated from the Guinea Current almost at the Equator.  --Lambiam 09:30, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The narrowest width of the Atlantic in that part of the world is apparently between the coast of South America at about 5 degrees S (Brazil) and the coast of Africa at about 8 degrees N (Sierra Leone), if that means anything. AnonMoos (talk) 11:55, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps the IHO was measuring from the bottom 99%, rather than from the top 1% ? Just a thought ... DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 21:36, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In general, boundaries between named bodies of water are ill defined. Where is the separation between the Celtic Sea and The Channel? The notion that the separation between the North and South Atlantic is along a parallel, or even along a geodesic such as the shortest connection between the coasts of South America and Africa, is a convenient but otherwise arbitrary convention. Among all the possibilities, using the Equator as the defining line is an obviously attractive choice.  --Lambiam 08:05, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May 28[edit]

Last U.S. troop deployments Korean War[edit]

Hi all, when was the last U.S. troop deployments to the Korean War? Or asked another way were there fresh U.S. troops to Korea in 1953? Thanks!2600:1702:690:F7A0:C4BD:D25D:38D2:2E03 (talk) 09:24, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Korean War Order of Battle (p. xxiv) says that on 2 July 1953, "24th US Infantry Division redeploys to Korea for rear-area security" (note that they had earlier been heavily engaged in the war and were withdrawn in January 1952 to reserve in Japan, so not all "fresh troops"). On 2 July, 187th Airborne Regimental Combat Team redeploys to Korea" (also from reserve in Japan and had previously deployed twice to Korea). Alansplodge (talk) 17:27, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks so much for the info and link Alansplodge. I will look at the link but maybe I should clarify the fresh comment, in short were there recruits that went through boot camp from the states and then were deployed to Korea in 1953? I will search the link but for instance I remember how Nixon stopped sending troops to Vietnam in 1972 even though it didn't end for months later (and really 1975). So to clarify was there any U.S. recruits who went to boot camp and then Korea in 1953? Or when was the last street to bootcamp to Korea U.S. service member? Thanks again!2600:1702:690:F7A0:2D12:DE71:B696:B550 (talk) 02:13, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry if I am being dense, but the US has an ongoing presence in South Korea to this day. Is there any reason a new boot camp recruit graduating today could not be sent there? See United_States_Forces_Korea RudolfRed (talk) 02:44, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes technically the war 'never ended' so for those that may misread my question its the 1950-July 1953 conflict. And just in case fresh new-from-stateside-bootcamp troops, any in 1953? When was the last? (I realize most already assume this, just trying to do the favor of making my inquiry clear :smile: ) These are all great links and I am learning new things but I still can't find the exact last deployment I described, appreciation for all and any help! 2600:1702:690:F7A0:2D12:DE71:B696:B550 (talk) 03:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not really my field, but looking at the source linked above, it seems that the same formations were kept in the Asia theatre, but rotated from the front line to rear areas or reserve in Japan. Some of these units would have experienced quite heavy casualties that would need to be replaced from training camps in the US. So although there were no fresh formations, it seems certain to me that the in-theatre formations would have had recruits fresh from training integrated into them. I can't find a source to support that, but see FNG syndrome for the Vietnam War equivalent. Alansplodge (talk) 10:05, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How related are Finns and East Asians?[edit]

After watching the movie Big Game, I mistook Finnish child actor Onni Tommila for being East Asian just because he resembled one. I also heard that Finns were originally considered as a Mongoloid race in the United States. Furthermore, Finns do have epicanthic folds, high-cheek bones, and small noses, similar to Chinese people, Japanese people, Koreans, Taiwanese people, and Mongolians. (talk) 18:10, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Helsinki Times commenting on this report in Nature: It's perfectly correct to say Finns are not Europeans due to their lack of genetic resemblance to Europeans. But Finns are also Asians as they really don't resemble anyone [...] in this respect.[5] -- (talk) 19:47, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not very much at all. This is a false trope that pops up from time to time, particularly in North America. People with ancestry from Finland (ethnic Finns, Swedish Finns, and Sámi) do not typically have epicanthic folds or East Asian-style small noses. I don't have a reliable source with data for the whole population but against that one child actor I invite you to take a look at the current Finnish government. Not one looks East Asian. So where does this false myth come from? Probably from the fact that Finnish and Sámi are part of a language family that is sometimes described as "Asian", but in this case that mainly means northern/western Siberia, not East Asia. It's a geographical description, not a racial one, but people who think in racial categories (as many North Americans have historically done) may jump to the wrong conclusion. And speaking a Siberian language does not mean all your ancestry comes from Siberia. At some point in their past, the ancestors of Finns did mix with Siberians who carried some East Asian ancestry, but this amount is small and not enough to affect their phenotypes much. Sámi, who some might expect to look more Asian because more of their customs are shared with Siberia, are similar. This is an ancient paper for a very fast-moving field, but is not paywalled and makes the key point succinctly: Their results suggested "the large genetic separation of the Saami from other Europeans is best explained by assuming that the Saami are descendants of a narrow, distinctive subset of Europeans." I'm not an expert but even the briefest look at subsequent research in the area confirms this (e.g. here). Matt's talk 21:21, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Seriously now, does Ismo look Asian? HiLo48 (talk) 07:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Are you replying to me? If so, then obviously no. Matt's talk 08:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Genetic studies on Sami has some details of genetic links with Siberia, but Sámi#Genetic studies tells why it's a touchy subject. Demographics of Finland notes that the Sámi represent a 5% minority of the Finnish population. The majority are Finns, who "originate between the Volga, Oka and Kama rivers in what is now Russia". Alansplodge (talk) 11:52, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jeanne Calment[edit]

One paragraph in Jeanne Calment's article says:

Geneticists have noted that, since Jeanne Calment had 16 distinct great-great-grandparents while her daughter Yvonne had only 12, the question of identity could easily be settled by a test for autozygous DNA, if a blood or tissue sample were to be made available.

The link is now 3 years old. Has such a blood/tissue sample been done yet?? If the answer is no, please explain what people have to wait for. Georgia guy (talk) 22:33, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reluctance to dig up a dead body to satisfy people's idle curiosity, possibly? AnonMoos (talk) 02:02, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May 29[edit]

Origin of sexagesimal timekeeping[edit]

Hello, again!

Years ago in my childhood, I remember being taught that we divide an hour into 60 minutes, and a minute into 60 seconds, owing to the base-60 Babylonian numerical system. Indeed, despite its antiquity, it was even better than our base-10 system for creating fractions—since multiples of 60 tend to divide evenly by any whole number in the decad (except maybe 7).

Recently, though, I encountered the Medieval table of Papias, which divided time as follows:

47 atoms == 1 ounce

8 ounces == 1 ostent

ostents == 1 moment

2⅔ moments == 1 part

parts == 1 minute

2 minutes == 1 point

5 points == 1 hour

How widespread was this method of timekeeping in the Middle Ages? Was it replaced with our current system when 12-hour mechanical clocks began to replace 24-hour water clocks in the 16th Century?

Can anybody here point to an academic paper chronicling how this all came to be? Was it in any way influenced by the adoption of Hindu-Arabic numbers when they displaced the old Roman ones?

Thank you for reading this. Pine (talk) 07:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Twinpinesmall are you thinking of some article work and want all sources which might be useful, or just those answering your specific questions? fiveby(zero) 17:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd appreciate any resources that might be useful.
I always assumed that sexagesimal horology had remained unchanged since ancient times. An article on how division of hours evolved would most definitely serve an academic purpose!
Pine (talk) 22:08, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Page 17 of Macey has more specific information.[6] Similar subdivisions have been used by other medieval authors: Bartholomew of England and Honorius of Autun.[7] The development of the subdivision of the hour from antiquity to today is probably not a straight line but contains some forks or independently originating parallel lines, with one approach eventually winning out.  --Lambiam 22:51, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The method described above looks like some medieval author's idea of a joke (it reminds me a bit of the monetary system in Harry Potter, which is a send-up of the pre-decimal English monetary units). Who would want to do math in base 47? Or deal with multiples of 2-2/3? -- Avocado (talk) 14:33, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


By the way, a substantial fraction of the medieval European population (perhaps the majority) did not use sexagesimal timekeeping -- they divided the day into twelve hours from sunrise to sunset, and another twelve hours from sunset to sunrise (not necessarily equal in length to the daylight hours), and had little need for precision beyond halves or quarters of an hour in their ordinary daily activities. The constant-length minute did not become widely known beyond astronomers, and others who had special need for precision time measurements, until public mechanical clocks began to be displayed in cities, around the 14th century. AnonMoos (talk) 06:36, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We have an article Atom (time), supposedly so named because it was considered "the smallest possible unit of time", equated in the Bible with the time of the blink of an eye.[8] It is defined in in Byrhtferth's Enchiridion as 1/564 of a moment (1½ minutes). Perhaps Byrhtferth or some predecessor determined this experimentally by counting how often he could blink in 90 seconds. Note that 564 = 12 × 47, so then the atom is 1/47 of an ounce (1/12 of a moment).  --Lambiam 12:24, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could Habiru have traveled by ship?[edit]

I'm wondering if they could have travelled by ship to Meluhha, and then become the origin of the Abhira.Rich (talk) 07:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I warned you about positing long-distance migrations between culturally-divergent peoples based solely on very vague word similarities in the 2022 September 10 archive. There's no logical reason why a Habiru person couldn't have got on board a ship, sometime during the late bronze age or early iron age centuries, but there's a strong incongruity between the fact that the Habiru seem to be associated with the deserts surrounding Canaan (insofar as the word doesn't just refer to poor people or malcontents or bandits within a civilization), vs. the idea of setting sail from southern Iraq. The maritime social disrupters of that era were the Sea Peoples, but they were in the Mediterranean, not the Persian Gulf... AnonMoos (talk) 07:53, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is this my last warning?Rich (talk) 03:38, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have no ability or desire to keep you from asking whatever you want here, as long as it falls within the allowed parameters of the Reference Desk, but I was a little disappointed that after you asked a much more reasonable question about the Moabites, you're now back to asking a rather unreasonable question (a slight variant of your Sept. 10 question, whose problematic assumptions were explained to you in detail then). AnonMoos (talk) 06:13, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry. I have read on Wikipedia though that the people that in Sumer were called Sa.Gaz lived in southern Mesopotamia. I don't see why they couldn't have got on ships or even been sailing on ships, to Meluhha. I'm sorry i'm such a disappointment  :-) (talk) 06:53, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is impossible to prove that some bunch of irregulars (Habiru is not an ethnic designation) could not have made the trek of several thousand miles (walking from Meluhha to Abhira country is still a considerable distance), but the idea is extremely unlikely and such speculation is pointless.  --Lambiam 10:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Lambiam, what has a point or is pointless depends on a person's values. I don't like the way you are talking. Now, you for example seem to place a high value on barnstars, which is your option but not mine l....also you are mixing your opinion on likelihood with your opinion on pointlessness.Rich (talk) 19:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The number of such potential questions is endless. Could the Perizzites have migrated to India and become the Purus? Yes. Is there any reason to think that the Purus were orginally Perizzites? No. Could the Argippaeans have migrated to Ireland and become the Cíarraige? ...  --Lambiam 11:32, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thor Heyerdahl was similarly obsessed with the idea of early long-distance migration by sea, which he proved might have been possible, but his theories have found little acedemic support. Alansplodge (talk) 15:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's not at all related but many acedemics like the common people will be traveling long-distance often by air in fact, so for similar reasons - logistics - if they ever did Abhira would have rather traced their link by land I think --Askedonty (talk) 21:27, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thor Heyerdahl was almost uniquely wrong-headed for someone who received a lot of favorable publicity, and wasn't simply dismissed as a crackpot. There's ample evidence (in linguistic affiliations and introduced plants and animals) for Polynesian migrations from the west, but Heyerdahl insisted on positing South American migrations from the east. Polynesians and Micronesians are known for their long-distance sailing voyages, while pre-Columbian seamanship on the western coast of South America was mostly coast-hugging rafts, but that didn't bother Heyerdahl in the slightest... AnonMoos (talk) 01:20, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nonsense or connection?[edit]

I saw a video on YouTube. It was uploaded sometime after the 2023 Nashville school shooting. In the video, Savannah Chrisley was seen making some sort of a statement, and crying. What does the tragedy have to do with her?2603:7000:8641:810E:338:32DA:589A:8A1B (talk) 10:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It made her sad. Blueboar (talk) 10:54, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
She's a somewhat famous person who has lived in the area. Being interviewed/commenting about the event is fairly expected.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 11:00, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Was she scared her young niece, Chloe, may have attended the school where the tragedy occurred?2603:7000:8641:810E:338:32DA:589A:8A1B (talk) 23:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Or maybe she merely emotionally distraught by the deaths of young children. Humans are capable of being sad, even if they don't personally know the people. It's called empathy. --Jayron32 11:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Empathy might be in short supply in Brooklyn. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:58, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The internet has multiple stories of Turkish küfeci workers who in the 1960s allegedly carried too drunken patrons (who couldn't walk) in baskets from bars to home. However, reliable sources that I found only mention küfeci workers as basketcarriers who carried out the coal to the surface in the Ottoman Empire (more generally they were the unskilled workers who formed the vast majority of the total workforce). The only book source that I found mentioning them as drunkard carriers is this one. Could it be a hoax or a joke? Brandmeistertalk 14:42, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Did you see the Snopes article? fiveby(zero) 14:54, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(ec) Küfeci's primary meaning is porter, and comes from "küfe", meaning a (wicker) basket and the suffix "ci", which denotes a profession or trade in Turkish (e.g. elektrikci is an electrician). So a küfeci is someone whose work involves carrying a basket. I have no idea if the ones you mention carrying drunk patrons from bars really existed or are an urban legend, but the word will refer first of all to a classic porter, like the coal porters you also mention. Xuxl (talk) 14:57, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the Snopes article. Good they tackled this meme. Brandmeistertalk 15:15, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can use küfelik in present-day Turkish for someone too drunk to walk by themselves.[9] While I don't know if there is any truth to the notion that in bygone times porters were actually employed by bars to carry such "basket cases" home, I can imagine that from time to time their services were sought in lieu of a cab service.  --Lambiam 19:32, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May 30[edit]

l’Unite in Brussels Belgium, 1939ish[edit]

Evening Folks, does anybody know what "l’Unite" sports club is or was? Apparently a place ran by Belgian communists militants, used a recruiting ground for the resistance before the war? scope_creepTalk

Unité (Eynheyt in Yiddish) seems to have been a Jewish communist sport club based in Brussels formed in around 1936. If you are referring to Sarah Goldberg (spy), there is a cite to Baumel-Schwartz, Judith Tydor; Cohen, Tova (2003). Gender, place and memory in the modern Jewish experience: re-placing ourselves.
"En 1936, la stratégie de ‘front populaire’ amène une partie d’entre ces dernières à fusionner, donnant naissance au YASK à Anvers [Antwerp], au DYSK [Demokratisher Yidisher Sportklub.] à Charleroi et à l’Eynheyt (Unité en yiddish) à Bruxelles, ce qui leur fournit un rayonnement et une audience dont l’impact laissera une trace importante dans la mémoire de la communauté juive."[1] Also cites the "magisterial work" of Rudi Van Doorslaer, Enfants du ghetto. Juifs révolutionnaires en Belgique (1925-1940), Bruxelles, Labor, 1997.
Also mentioned in Het Belgische Jiddischland by Rudi Van Doorslaer, p. 35 (in Dutch).
The French article fr:Sarah Goldberg (résistante) refers to Yask, "Yiddishe Arbeter Sport Klub" which may have some relevant links. YASK was an international organisation with branches in at least Belgium, France and Vilnius[2] which which emerged out of the immigrant, working class neighborhood of Paris' Xth arrondissement in 1929.[3] YASK was "affilié à la FST-CGTU [Fédération Sportive du Travail (FST) - Confédération Générale du Travail Unitaire (CGTU)] et un soutien déclaré au Front populaire et à l'Espagne républicaine ; il était aussi membre de la LICA (et à partir de 1949 du MRAP)." [10]
From fr:Emanuel Mink: "Né à Tomaszow en Pologne en 1910, il émigra à Anvers [Antwerp]. Membre du Yask, club sportif des ouvriers juifs. Il intégra l'équipe belge qui devait participer à la Spartakiade, les Jeux olympiques ouvriers de juillet 1936 à Barcelone. Mais cette manifestation fut annulée en raison du putsch militaire de Franco." Most of this is covered in our brief Yask article. Many Resistance fighters seem to have joined YASK before WW2.
There doesn't seem to be much info specifically about L'Unité, but Simple brokers or creators? French communist sports leaders and the Eastern European sports model (1923–1991) may have some pointers. MinorProphet (talk) 15:14, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See also:
Alansplodge (talk) 08:37, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Special ITU one-letter country codes[edit]

Countries have in general a three-letter ITU country code. Eight exceptions are  B,  D,  E,  F,  G,  I,  J and  S. But why exactly those eight? There are many other large and historically important countries that would "deserve" it, especially in comparison to Sweden. --KnightMove (talk) 06:11, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some commonality with the single-letter International vehicle registration codes, though there are differences. AnonMoos (talk) 06:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Right, but in this case, most single letters of the alphabet are used where there is a feasible country; and in general, it is a mixed one/two/three letter code. This is logical. But the ITU code is a dedicated three-letter code with eight exceptions. But why those eight, exactly? --KnightMove (talk) 06:30, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pure speculation, but one might think that JAP could be considered offensive, while BRA also lends itself to unfunny jokes.  --Lambiam 09:38, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yet JPN and BRZ are available, as well as numerous other less likely offensive three letter combinations. --Jayron32 11:08, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I suspect, given that all 8 date from the earliest years of the ITU (many, but not all, were founding members) is that these 8 are "grandfathered in" in some way; likely they were already using these codes at the time the ITU Code was established, and were allowed to keep their single-letter codes. --Jayron32 11:14, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, thank you. Where have you found the founding members please? --KnightMove (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Member states of the International Telecommunication Union has a list of when each member joined. Presumably, those that joined on the earliest date, 1865/5/17, would be the founding members. Of the 8 you listed, 5 joined on that date, and the others before 1880 (Britain in 1871, Brazil in 1877, Japan in 1879). --Jayron32 18:11, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • Are there info about the lives of the baby and two women after Solomon's judgement?
  • Who were the Queen of Sheba's parents?
  • Are there info about the Giant Goliath's life before David killed him? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:31, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What does your copy of the Bible have to say about those matters? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(edit conflict) regarding #1, the Judgement of Solomon is not known as a story as such outside of the Bible (except in parallel stories not involving Solomon, but involving the same basic narrative, from other cultures and traditions) and its historicity is not documented as such. Which is to say, the story is likely a parable and not meant to be seen as an historical event. Regarding #2: the Queen of Sheba's parentage is not mentioned in the Bible. However, I believe she has a more extensive narrative in the Kebra Nagast, the foundational Ethiopian national epic, so you might be able to find more about her from there. No contemporary evidence, it should be noted, exists for Solomon or the Queen of Sheba, pretty much all we know about either of them is material written down centuries (in the case of the Bible) or millenia (in the case of the Kebra Nagast) later. --Jayron32 18:05, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, but the woman who lied was punished? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:21, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To simplify what was explained above. It's a story, told to make a moral point, and is older than Hebrew culture. The Hebrew (Bible) version was first written down many centuries after it supposedly happened. It (almost certainly) never actually happened: the women and the baby (almost certainly) never existed in real life. Even Solomon may never have actually existed in real life. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 18:48, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Math joke: if only King Solomon had known about the Banach-Tarski paradox. Instead of cutting the baby into two pieces, he could have suggested 5 pieces and made both mothers happy. 2602:243:2007:9990:8A6:A89B:8B0A:E2B1 (talk) 22:05, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As Shylock discovered to his eternal chagrin, cutting babies into pieces involves a loss of blood, even if you put the pieces back together. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:13, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Our Goliath article covers everything we know about him. He may have come from the city-state of Gath in Philistia. The mention of him having a brother called Lahmi is thought to have been a much later addition. Alansplodge (talk) 16:07, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Zorro (TV series 1957)[edit]

At the ending of episode 30 of season 1, Sergeant Garcia received a royal Spanish honorificient. Can you find its name in the real-life? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does the episode give it a name? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's an iron cross, but you must see that episode in English to find its name and form. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:13, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is quite likely, if the award was not named, that it was a generic prop used by the TV series, and not intended to be historically accurate. The Walt Disney Company, who produced the TV series, was not known for scrupulous historical detail. --Jayron32 18:19, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But can you search for it in 1820's Spanish royal iron crosses? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:44, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Have you read Orders, decorations, and medals of Spain? See if you can recognise any of the emblems or medal ribbons there from the TV episode you watched (which probably few if any responders here have access to). {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 18:55, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please, can you confront it, since I don't have time? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:12, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The episode (available on Disney+) refers to it as the "Medal of the Royal Yeoman", which doesn't seem to actually exist, and the pictured medal (a Maltese cross sort of thing) isn't pictured in that article, and is probably just a generic medal prop. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 22:00, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You "don't have time"? How badly do you want to know the answer? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:53, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Unfortunately, the questioner has no time to reply.  --Lambiam 10:17, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In any case, "Yeoman" is a specifically English word and concept, which almost certainly would not be applicable in any Spanish context and would not be an appropriate English translation, and the term "Iron cross" has strong German connotations in the English speaking world (although Belgium also has such an award). {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 12:13, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy Memorial Day[edit]

An acquaintance (living in the US but not originally from here) just emailed, wishing me a happy Memorial day. Of course I appreciated the sentiment but given the nature of the holiday, the incongruity made me smile. Is there a more appropriate expression for the same idea, and should I let the person know? Thanks. 2602:243:2007:9990:8A6:A89B:8B0A:E2B1 (talk) 21:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just wait a few weeks and reply with “Wishing you a merry Flag Day” Blueboar (talk) 22:09, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It does seem incongruous, but it has evolved into the first holiday of the summer season. Whether to wish someone a "happy" Memorial Day might depend on whether anyone in their family died in combat. If so, probably not the best kind of greeting. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:57, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is not forbidden to enjoy Memorial Day. It creates a three-day weekend for most people in the United States. Therefore, it is a mini-holiday. People are expected to have fun and enjoy themselves. You can argue that they are celebrating the freedom given by those who died in military service. (talk) 16:17, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Anzac Day in Australia is apparently rather celebratory; Australian visitors to the UK are sometimes surprised by the sombre tone of our Remembrance Sunday. Alansplodge (talk) 08:36, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Violence against international students in China[edit]

International students have money and local Chinese youths have no money and they are angry at the CCP for their situation. Do jobless Chinese youths express their anger at the CCP (Communist Party of China) by beating up international students and steal their money & bank cards in China? (talk) 22:48, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Probably some do. It's an really big country with a lot of people, and some of them are probably that sort of asshole. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 23:06, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When a penniless Chinese person, young or old, commits violent robbery in China, my first idea would be that they do this to obtain money and not to express anger at the CCP, regardless of the victim's nationality and educational status.  --Lambiam 10:11, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If this happens, it has apparently escaped the notice of the internet, as far as I can tell. Alansplodge (talk) 15:42, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Our article on Crime in China gives some information but honestly it is not very good. And unfortunately mainland China does not participate in the International Crime Victims Survey, so we do not have good comparative data on crime rates there. But violent crime against foreign nationals is extremely low in mainland China, especially in the major cities where international students are found. For example, this blogpost by a then-respected magazine says "Beijing is usually considered to be extremely safe by expats". I was an international student in China for several years, and lived there for a decade, and I don't think I ever heard of an international student being attacked for their money. I am also puzzled by your assumption that young Chinese people would attack international students because they opposed the government. When I did hear of attacks on foreigners, they were usually aligned with official campaigns, as in the wave of attacks reported here by the South China Morning Post. Matt's talk 21:17, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

June 1[edit]

Official Maps for Qinghai and Gansu[edit]

Are there any up-to-date official maps published by the Chinese government (PRC) of Chinese provinces particularly Qinghai and Gansu available online? StellarHalo (talk) 01:34, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Japanese rokuyō (6-day cycle)[edit]

Who invented the Japanese rokuyō (六曜) system, and how was it decided which day is when? Why does the sequence get disrupted at the beginning of a new lunar month?

Today, June 1, 2023, is "butsumetsu" (仏滅). How was it decided that this particular day is "butsumetsu"? And what is a "butsumetsu" day supposed to be good for? Staying in bed all day? 2601:18A:C500:E830:5810:7A20:571F:3C3 (talk) 07:05, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have you looked at Japanese calendar#Rokuyō? It doesn't answer all your questions, but it says how they are calculated. ColinFine (talk) 10:01, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]