→Psychology of Russian soldiers in Ukraine: Sorry I previewed but forgot about this and can't see ina single seciton preview |
|||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 312: | Line 312: | ||
:::: I'm not saying that no such path exists. Possibly someone studying ''The Psychology of War Crimes'' might find one. But that would be an achievement worthy of a Nobel Price for Peace – way above my league. ◅ [[User:SebastianHelm|Sebastian]] 05:00, 4 April 2022 (UTC) |
:::: I'm not saying that no such path exists. Possibly someone studying ''The Psychology of War Crimes'' might find one. But that would be an achievement worthy of a Nobel Price for Peace – way above my league. ◅ [[User:SebastianHelm|Sebastian]] 05:00, 4 April 2022 (UTC) |
||
:::::'Humanity' and 'perpetrators' require exact definitions in this context and not any loose usage. In some senses the contribution to peace was made long ago, we do not "look" for the humanity of anyone, the very basis of [[liberalism]] is that we never deny it. [[User:Fiveby|fiveby]]([[User talk:Fiveby|zero]]) 15:12, 4 April 2022 (UTC) |
:::::'Humanity' and 'perpetrators' require exact definitions in this context and not any loose usage. In some senses the contribution to peace was made long ago, we do not "look" for the humanity of anyone, the very basis of [[liberalism]] is that we never deny it. [[User:Fiveby|fiveby]]([[User talk:Fiveby|zero]]) 15:12, 4 April 2022 (UTC) |
||
{{cot|Sorry I've tried to ignore the OP's soapboxing but I just can't any more so yes I'll soapbox myself [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 14:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)}} |
|||
::::::<p>I've tried to ignore this but with the OP's latest post I just can't. I've said before I detest what is happening in Ukraine but I'm also deeply troubled by the OP's implications there's something somehow unique about what is going on in Ukraine beyond the fact it's a prosperous well developed European countries with a decent military. In addition to Fiveby's post, it's worth noting that according to our article, the inhumane (as per the OP) double tap strike has been used by the US in Pakistan and Yemen. As per Lambiam's point, I'm sure one justification the US has used is that they're all militants so it's fine. But this gets into how we actually know beyond blindly trusting the US or weird definitions sometimes used like everyone who has a weapon in a current as violent as those or especially Afghanistan or Iraq must be a militant. </p><p>If we stick with Yemen, while undoubtedly a lot of horrors are going on in Ukraine, there's a lot of horrors going on in Yemen too but generally ignored except for the occasional mention when it go too severe. These have mostly been committed by Saudi Arabia and/or the UAE along with the Houthis and (generally less directly) Iran, but the two former have often been using support and weapons from the West. This has often included maintenance of military aircraft etc. [//www.fcnl.org/updates/2021-05/saudi-blockade-yemen-frequently-asked-questions] (OTOH, the US seems quite willing to try and cut off all maintenance for Russian civilian aircraft when they can, including threatening anyone who tries with US sanctions. This may mean some who haven't banned Russian airlines will be forced to do so, but the more likely effect as with Iran is that they will continue to travel but with aircraft increasingly at risk of major incidents including crashes due to a lack of maintenance.) </p><p>The conflict in Yemen is an interesting case study in the complexity of relationships. As [[Houthi movement]] mentions, while they are Shia who have sometimes mistreated Sunni Muslims, they have allied with some at times too. They are also Arabs, as with most Yemenis. And it's not like the areas they control are exclusively Shia. I mean attacking a prison [//www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-60082788] may even mean killing those who have been mistreated for being Sunni. (To be clear, I'm not suggesting anyone involved knew it was a prison at the time.) Are these collateral damage, still not "sisterly" enough or ??? Beyond those directly killed in attacks, there are many again including many Sunni Arabs killed by starvation etc thanks in no small part to the Saudi Arabian blockade. </p><p>While okay, a lot of this is indirect e.g. the blockade and air attacks and there are fewer people on the ground, this has also meant it's easy for images etc to get out very fast. And despite the censorship in Saudi Arabia and to a less extent the UAE, it's been going on for so long, one would assume quite a few Saudi Arabians and Emiratis involved know about what's going on; but it still goes on. And yes, [[pan-Arabism]] is a somewhat recent development, there's still a fair amount of tribalism in those areas, but I think it's way too simplistic to suggest that's why people are fine with these deaths. Meanwhile major Western powers like the US and frankly even Germany clearly have the ability to tell Saudi Arabia to fuck off and override the blockade or do other stuff, but they don't. Although yes you could say racism and a lack of care about people who are seen as different or always dying or killing each other etc is one reason but then this also harks back to my first point about how what's going on in Ukraine isn't really unique. Since it's only so if you embrace such views. </p><p>And meanwhile, no one seems to know what to do about Afghanistan after the Taliban takeover and too few seem to care. While the Taliban may be horrors in many ways, it doesn't seem they're intentionally trying to starve or freeze their people, instead their takeover and no one wanting to deal with them means the Afghanistan economy has collapsed and most aid the relied on has dried up. Enough has been done to avoid the worse predictions for now [//www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/famine-may-have-been-averted-afghan-economic-crisis-deepens-un-envoy-2022-03-02/], whether that's going to continue though, that doesn't seem clear. </p><p>The OP mention the US civil war, but while quite few civil wars involve people with different ethnicity or religions fighting each other, there are a lot of civil war and conflicts which involved other recent disputes generally political i.e. these are not centuries long views of each other as a foe. For example when South American dictators were torturing, throwing people out of airplanes often with the tactic support of the US and probably parts of Western Europe, this was generally mostly due to recent political differences. (And by no means were children etc spared these atrocities.) Korea and China/Taiwan are other disputes largely political. I won't bother to discuss Libya, Syria, Chechnya (both which has already came up), Egypt, Lebanon, Mali, Ethiopia or the hotbutton of them all Israel/Palestine but them and many other examples are worth looking in to if you think Ukraine is somehow an outlier nowadays in terms of what people are willing to do to each other when you convince them somehow the other side is the enemy. </p><p>Incidentally, in the early days of the Ukrainian conflict, there were ample reports of Ukrainian border guards etc preventing African and Indian non-citizen residents mostly students from leaving giving priority to white Ukrainians. While it wasn't totally clear from what I read how much this involved Polish officials, there were also reports of them being mistreated or threatened in Polish border towns. [//www.bbc.com/news/live/world-africa-60392223/page/2] Most of these people probably didn't want to stay in Poland anyway, I mean they wanted to continue their studies somewhere if possible and would have been fine doing that in Poland but in the absence of that then they'll probably have gone home. Showing how farcical this was, Nigeria at one stage suggested their citizens go to Hungary instead [//www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-60555650], where self-styled illiberal democrat Viktor Orban with his well known controversial views on migrants etc has now won re-election [//www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60978909]. (Although it is true that Poland and Hungary have recently been competing to see who can annoy the EU etc the most with their policies including hardline stances on migration.) </p><p>I won't bother to discuss Belarus's attempts to use migrants to punish the EU and the Polish response including many reports of pushbacks and abuse which the EU seemed to have tactically accepted but it's something else worth looking into. [//www.hrw.org/news/2021/11/24/belarus/poland-abuse-pushbacks-border] </p><p>Back to Ukraine, perhaps using molotovs cocktails [//www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/25/ukraine-civilians-weapons-molotov/] and poisoning soldiers with offered pastries [//www.jpost.com/international/article-703228] [//www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ukrainian-villagers-kill-russian-soldiers-poison-pies-67w727fz5] is a form of legitimate resistance, but even if we put aside whether it'll be seen that way or instead terrorist attacks in a different conflict, it doesn't seem it will help Russian soldiers see civilians as civilians instead of deadly enemies. While this doesn't excuse atrocities committed, we've seen in many many conflicts, Afghanistan and Vietnam are obvious examples involving the West where ethnicity, religious or other differences aside; one factor which seems to have made forces involved willing to commit atrocities is they began to see everyone as the enemy in part because of how easy it was for someone who seemed a civilian to be a combatant. </p><p>And while it's hard to know in the fog of war, all reports suggest quite a few Russians military personnel have been killed. Vast majority may have been by Ukrainian military but ultimately if your comrades (collegues or even friends) are being killed, it doesn't seem that surprising your views on everyone on the other side may harden. While you may also blame your commanders to some extent, this tends to be more about preparation, tactics, planning etc. As mentioned by others above, military training often discourages anything thinking about the legitimacy of a conflict and especially that your side is the "evil" one. (I'm reminded of the FPS [[America's Army]] which was funded by the US government where for understandable reasons you were always the US Army even though as a classic team PvP FPS, the two teams were always on opposite sides.) </p><p>Alansplodge already mention this, but will Putin's de-Nazification is utter crap his claim about atrocities in the civil war by the Ukrainian side is mostly likely just serious overblown rather than utter bullshit. It's probably also worth looking into why the [[Azov Battalion]] was so successful. And the Ukrainians haven't been particularly friendly to Russian culture or language among their citizens in recent times. Yet it's perhaps not surprising there is mistrust and a hardening on views when there is a civil war and a divided territory, and this occurs on both sides. </p><p>And we also shouldn't ignore how someone's world view significantly affects what they see is happening. This relates to points made above by Lambiam and others, a number of the atrocities have been committed fairly remote. The theater bombing is one specific example which received a lot of attention for a time. But while it's easy for us to say how could you do that, they even wrote kids on the ground; it's also easy to imagine some of those involved thought and probably still think pull the other leg with your Ukrainian propaganda, what weapons are you hiding there? </p><p>That said though, I've also recently seen reports which answered one question I had before the conflict began namely how the Russian government who was seemingly up until not long before they attacked saying it was all Western propaganda etc would deal with the switch. At the time the US etc were suggesting a false flag attack but for whatever reason this never happened. Instead the Russians just seem to have just tried with suddenly emphasising the Nazi points etc. Anyway according to these reports one of the reasons for the low morale beyond the failures, deaths etc has been because there are a fair few on the ground who are confused about what they're doing given what they were told until very recently. </p><p>[[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 14:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)</p> |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
= April 3 = |
= April 3 = |
Revision as of 14:02, 5 April 2022
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
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.
March 29
Repairing the St Nazaire Raid
When did the damage to the St Nazaire drydock get repaired? HMS Campbeltown (I42) says that it happened in 1947, while St Nazaire Raid and Louis Joubert Lock say 1948. 49.198.51.54 (talk) 06:12, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- In Louis Joubert Lock § St. Nazaire Raid, we read, "The first ship to be accommodated after being repaired was the former German ocean liner Europa, which on refit became the SS Liberté, given to France by the United States in compensation for the loss of the Normandie in New York." According to book sources, the damaged ship was towed to Saint-Nazaire in 1947, arriving 11 November 1947.[1] The lock must therefore have been operational then. --Lambiam 08:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed; an English language source for the 1947 date is:
- Ironically, when the dock was finally put back into service, it would be for the benefit of the long-suffering inhabitants of the port of St Nazaire, and the first ship to be re-fitted in it, arriving on 11 November, 1947, would be an ex-German liner, sailing under her new name, Liberté.
- Dorrian, James G (2001). Storming St. Nazaire: The Gripping Story of the Dock-busting Raid, March 1942. Barnsley, South Yorkshire: Pen & Sword Books Ltd. p. 285. ISBN 978-0850528077.
- Alansplodge (talk) 11:41, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- A slight nitpick, but the day the ship arrived in port isn't necessarily the same as when it was put in drydock. It may have been towed to St Nazaire a few weeks early, for example to avoid winter storms on the ocean. PiusImpavidus (talk) 12:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed, but our article relates that she was refitting at Le Havre in December 1946 when a storm caused her to break her moorings, collide with the wreck of SS Paris (1916) and then sank. She was raised in April 1947. It is unlikely that she would have been moved before the dock was ready for her, so it seems safe to follow the sources, unless you can find anything to the contrary. Alansplodge (talk) 13:16, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- Le Havre is the port the worst damaged in Europe ( ..reconstruction..) after the Normandy landings with about 350 sunken ships in its waters, St-Nazaire by contrast seems to have had almost no other trafic than coal importation, and the business of its own reconstruction. Note the Lock was quite early repaired because of "découverte à Gustavburg d'une porte écluse" designed by the Germans for St Nazaire: Aspects (..) de le reconstruction de St Nazaire. --Askedonty (talk) 20:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- So this "rapid repair" directly contradicts the timing given in Louis Joubert Lock ("the Joubert Lock remained out of commission for the rest of the war, and it did not function again until 1948"). --Lambiam 23:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- I do not think it does. The Joubert Lock or Normandie Dock is one part of the shipyard itself ( bassin Penhoet, see the "St Nazaire docks 1942" 3D view at Louis Joubert Lock#St. Nazaire Raid. Most of the bassin extends a further length to the right of the picture, it also includes a row of three other (smaller) drydocks side by side in fact ), so the ex-Europa might have been moored -and prepared for two month or more before the Joubert Lock deemed operational again. --Askedonty (talk) 09:10, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm obviously completely wrong. The Saga Pearl II with a similar beam has been able to enter the port in 2016 but it's not considered usual and her length is about on third less, the same going for draft. The entry port is not allowing for draft over 8.5 m as Europa 9.5 m. --Askedonty (talk) 10:42, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- And we have yet the French liner Île_de_France, length :791 ft (241.1 m), beam : 91 ft (27.7 m), from the shipyard Penhoet, arriving at St Nazaire for refit in April 1947 ? Badly sourced, SS Île de France, post-war career and demise, but the date of 21 April 1947 at least is not contradicted in La Ville de Boulogne-Billancourt, médiathèque According to that video, starting at 20:00, the refit is between 1948 and 1950 however. The correct statement would perhaps be "on 21 April 1947 she was returned to the French line"? At the same time, this could have come from prudent uncertainty with a comment from the seventies: Île de France is known to have been back at sea in 1949 after a refit during two years. No precise date again on that youtube video but Île de France definitely is to be seen inside the shipyard. ( Near the beginning of the video also a view of "Liberté" in restored drydock ) --Askedonty (talk) 13:43, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- The 3D view at Louis Joubert Lock shows the Joubert Lock (labelled "Normandie Dock") and the Penhoët basin as separate entities. Of these, only the lock could be drained and serve as a dry dock. --Lambiam 23:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- It is (currently ?) owned by the port (fr:Grand port maritime de Nantes-Saint-Nazaire), an entity created in 1966. It doesn't mean that it's not used by Penhoet (whatever that is), as a user. See for example Ouest-France: Saint-Nazaire pourquoi ce nom de forme joubert: "350 m long, 50 m wide and just over 15 m deep, the Joubert form offers large vessels direct access to the Penhoët basin. As a lock, it serves at the same time as a form of refit for the maintenance and construction of ships, sometimes submerged, sometimes dry." (translation Google) --Askedonty (talk) 08:10, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- The Ateliers et Chantiers de Saint-Nazaire Penhoët (founded in 1862 as Chantiers Scott but renamed in 1881 after the expansion of the Saint-Nazaire harbour with the Penhoët basin) merged in 1955 with its neighbour the Ateliers et Chantiers de la Loire (established in 1881) to form the current Chantiers de l'Atlantique. Penhoët is the name of a Saint-Nazaire neighbourhood that became the eponym of the shipyard. --Lambiam 17:48, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- It is (currently ?) owned by the port (fr:Grand port maritime de Nantes-Saint-Nazaire), an entity created in 1966. It doesn't mean that it's not used by Penhoet (whatever that is), as a user. See for example Ouest-France: Saint-Nazaire pourquoi ce nom de forme joubert: "350 m long, 50 m wide and just over 15 m deep, the Joubert form offers large vessels direct access to the Penhoët basin. As a lock, it serves at the same time as a form of refit for the maintenance and construction of ships, sometimes submerged, sometimes dry." (translation Google) --Askedonty (talk) 08:10, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- If not yet a definitively concluding answer as to the exact conditions exposed by Alansplodge, above, a rather strong suspicion thereof nonetheless. According to an engineering firm involved in related maintenance, "The downstream door was in fact the former upstream door, displaced in 1948." (ISM études techniques ingénierie et maîtrise d’œuvre) This rearrangement reasonably would have happened as the new replacement door (the Gustavsburg door) was to be set in place. That door was the one needed to replace that which had been destroyed during the 1942 raid, so in order to make the Louis Joubert Lock fully functional again. But we do not know from what kind of source that 1948 date precisely was taken from. --Askedonty (talk) 15:25, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- In April 1948 Liberté is at dry in the inside but the "upstream" access to the Penhoet basin is not operational: aerial photograph, forum. Ile de France is not featured on the cliche. --Askedonty (talk) 08:35, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note that Liberté was already put at dry (bassin de radoub n°7) in le Havre after being raised in April 47. N°7 dock is even deeper than the Joubert; although narrower. This shows that further expected technical capacities were available at St-Nazaire rather than at Le Havre. --Askedonty (talk) 09:58, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- The 3D view at Louis Joubert Lock shows the Joubert Lock (labelled "Normandie Dock") and the Penhoët basin as separate entities. Of these, only the lock could be drained and serve as a dry dock. --Lambiam 23:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- So this "rapid repair" directly contradicts the timing given in Louis Joubert Lock ("the Joubert Lock remained out of commission for the rest of the war, and it did not function again until 1948"). --Lambiam 23:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- Le Havre is the port the worst damaged in Europe ( ..reconstruction..) after the Normandy landings with about 350 sunken ships in its waters, St-Nazaire by contrast seems to have had almost no other trafic than coal importation, and the business of its own reconstruction. Note the Lock was quite early repaired because of "découverte à Gustavburg d'une porte écluse" designed by the Germans for St Nazaire: Aspects (..) de le reconstruction de St Nazaire. --Askedonty (talk) 20:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- I interpret the "arriving" in the English source as meaning "arriving at the dock". The French source states that the ship was "entrusted" to the shipyard on 11 November 1947. --Lambiam 23:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- Have we "arrived" at a consensus as too how we can edit these articles in a consistent way? Alansplodge (talk) 09:39, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed, but our article relates that she was refitting at Le Havre in December 1946 when a storm caused her to break her moorings, collide with the wreck of SS Paris (1916) and then sank. She was raised in April 1947. It is unlikely that she would have been moved before the dock was ready for her, so it seems safe to follow the sources, unless you can find anything to the contrary. Alansplodge (talk) 13:16, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- A slight nitpick, but the day the ship arrived in port isn't necessarily the same as when it was put in drydock. It may have been towed to St Nazaire a few weeks early, for example to avoid winter storms on the ocean. PiusImpavidus (talk) 12:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Museum Extention Project
I need help finding reliable sources for the Museum Extention Project. This was a project under FDR’s New Deal programs. I have found a book from a library in Florida. However, there is not much details other than that collection of exhibits. Any aid would be greatly appreciated! LoveLeylaLoveleyla (talk) 18:25, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- The Museum: A Short History of Crisis and Resilience (p. 45 onwards) Alansplodge (talk) 19:32, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- WPA Museum Extension Project 1935 from Bienes Museum of the Modern Book looks to have some essays, list of state projects, and maybe a useful bibliography
- Miner, Curtis (Spring 2008). "Art with a Purpose: Pennsylvania's Museum Extension Project, 1935-1943". Pennsylvania Heritage.
March 30
Nixon and Kissinger's support for Bangladesh genocide
Nowadays you will see lots of Americans protesting against Trump, George Bush. Why in those days Americans didn't protest against Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon?
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/nixon-and-kissingers-forgotten-shame.html
There are other reports that American politicians in 1971, 1972 were trying their best that, the international community should never discuss mass killings and rapes by Pakistan Army.
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/nixon-and-kissingers-forgotten-shame.html -- Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawliht (talk o contribs) 02:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- The public was kept unaware of their support for Pakistan's military regime. There were mass protests, but they focussed on the US involvement in the Vietnam War (see Protests against the Vietnam War). --Lambiam 07:15, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- Protests against Nixon and Kissinger were rampant, though not usually about issues related to Bangladesh. As noted above, protests against U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War actually date back to the Lyndon Baines Johnson administration (one well known chant of the time was "Hey, Hey, LBJ, How Many Kids Did You Kill, Today"). Early in the Nixon Administration protest leaders like the Chicago Seven, the Weather Underground, the Students for a Democratic Society, etc. Even during the 1968 election, BOTH parties were under fire from protesters, and Nixon was not immune from continuing protests when he took office. The Democratic National Convention protests, organized in 1968 by the Chicago Seven, later led to the Days of Rage protests in 1969, which were definitely targeted at the Nixon administration. (As a side note, I once had Bill Ayers as a professor, and have had dinner at his and Bernardine Dohrn's house in the early 2000s). You also have the 1971 May Day protests, the 1970 Watergate protests (not related to the later scandal), and probably many others. Kissinger himself has been the subject of protests as recently as 2018: [2]--Jayron32 12:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- Rawliht -- Kissinger seems to have acted very poorly over what became Bangladesh (ranking the importance of the India-Soviet alliance far above all other factors), but the United States actually had somewhat limited leverage over (West) Pakistan at the time: it could have at most given Pakistan a diplomatic "red light" instead of a "green light", but Pakistan might not have chosen to change its actions in any very significant way in response to a U.S. "red light". Anyway, there were demonstrations over the U.S. role in Vietnam and demonstrations over the U.S. role in the coup in Chile (see Solidarity Movement with Chile), but apparently few people in the early 1970s thought that the U.S. government was a major direct cause of East Pakistan's woes (as opposed to passively acquiescing to them). AnonMoos (talk) 17:48, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- There were some protests ("Americans Protest U.S. Role". Pakistan Forum. October 1971. JSTOR 2569110.), mostly over arms shipments to Pakistan[3], "blockades" of ships by Movement for a New Society. Apparently enough publicity for the International Longshoremen’s Association to take some kind of action.[4][5]. The Concert for Bangladesh#Aftermath claims increasing awareness of arms shipments.
- Taylor, Richard K. (2013). Blockade: A Guide to Nonviolent Intervention.
- Jaffe, Samuel (2022). An Internal Matter: The stories of those who campaigned in the US for the Liberation War.
- but can't find online copies for either. fiveby(zero) 19:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- There were some protests ("Americans Protest U.S. Role". Pakistan Forum. October 1971. JSTOR 2569110.), mostly over arms shipments to Pakistan[3], "blockades" of ships by Movement for a New Society. Apparently enough publicity for the International Longshoremen’s Association to take some kind of action.[4][5]. The Concert for Bangladesh#Aftermath claims increasing awareness of arms shipments.
16 and 17 year-old topless "page 3 girls" from back when they were legal
Reading an old (now modified) version of our article Page 3 index.php?title=Page_3&oldid=1036564071
A number of Page 3 models, including Fox, Whittaker, and Ashby, began their topless modelling careers aged 16, which was legally permitted in the UK until the Sexual Offences Act 2003 raised the minimum age for topless modelling to 18.
My question is, what about people and institutions (such as libraries) who keep archives of old (pre-2003) versions of The Sun, which contain topless photos of 16 and 17 year olds? Are these libraries and individuals guilty of possessing child pornography?
I'm sure Great Britain has its "central library" which keeps archived versions of old newspapers, but, not being from the UK, I don't know the exact name of the institution(s) in question. (Maybe the British Library, judging by a quick google search?). Are/were they required to go through their old archives and destroy all pre-2003 "page 3s" which depict 16 and 17-year olds topless? Have they done so? If not, are they breaking the law? (Does the law contain a grandfather clause for material produced back when such material was legal?)
Obligatory disclaimer: I do not live in the U.K., so I'm not asking for legal advice. Eliyohub (talk) 04:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- The British Library operates the Legal Deposit scheme.[6] The law you're referring to contains a 'Legitimate Reason' defence. How far it applies on any day is anyone's guess - not very far - but the following reference may provide some clues:[7] Another reference talking about how libraries do sometimes draw the line:[8] Judging by their statement there, they may be obliged to restrict access to content rather than not store it, although I'm not sure how likely that is. I am sure many libraries have quietly disposed of their copies over time. -- zzuuzz (talk) 11:56, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- If you go to the article on the law, the change meant amending the Protection of Children Act 1978 to change the age threshold from 16 to 18. The law makes it a crime to possess "indecent" images of such persons. "Indecent" is not defined in the statute. Basically, it's "indecent" and therefore criminal if a court says it is. Commercial publications are generally going to err on the side of caution, which explains why they're not going around testing the law. --47.147.118.55 (talk) 07:01, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Name of Tibet
Do we know how the ancient Persians or Greeks would have called Tibet or the Tibetan Empire? Was it mentioned in one of the geographical treaties? The Great Zaganza (talk) 08:07, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- According to Etymology of Tibet, "
It has even been suggested that this name is to be found in Ptolemy and the Periplus Maris Erythraei, a first-century Greek narrative, where the river Bautisos and a people called the Bautai are mentioned in connexion with a region of Central Asia. But we have no knowledge of the existence of Tibetans at that time.
These Greek terms may be related to modern Tibetan names for their own land. However, as it notes, that as an ethnic group, it is not clear that Tibetans existed during the period of ancient Greece (That's not surprising, given the way culture and ethnicity evolve, ignoring things like the names of ethnic groups, most modern ethnic groups would not be recognizable as such that far back). The traditional narrative of the Tibetan empire is that it traces itself back through the Yarlung dynasty, which is likely mythical; the evidence of a Tibetan state before the 8th century is tenuous at best. Histories of the time period before then are not unlike Norse kings tracing their lineage back to Odin. From what I am reading in Wikipedia articles, there is only the slightest evidence that the Greeks or Persians of ancient times had any awareness of people groups living on the Tibetan plateau of the time, and that there is also scant evidence of these people living in state societies at that time. --Jayron32 12:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- That is from the early medieval period, a millennium later than what is normally understood to be Ancient Greece. --Jayron32 18:02, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- However, the original questioner mentioned the Tibetan Empire..., AnonMoos (talk) 18:53, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, but the chronologies don't match up. The Tibetan Empire and the Ancient Persian and Greek polities didn't coexist on earth. It would be like asking "What did Byzantine Empire think about the U.S.?" --Jayron32 11:19, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- ProQuest has a preview of Beckwith's 1977 dissertation, which unfortunately ends mid-introduction to Ptolemy and Ammianus Marcellinus and Baetae. For Persians, Tubbat and 9th century Beckwith, Christopher (1989). "The Location and Population of Tibet According to Early Islamic Sources". Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 43 (2/3): 163–170. JSTOR 23657789.
...it is quite clear that the Arabs were aware of the actual location of Tibet from the earliest times — and certainly no later than when the geographer Ibn Khurdâdhbih wrote in the mid-ninth century.
See also Akasoy, Anna (2009). "Alexander in the Himalayas". Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes. 72: 1–20. JSTOR 40593762. fiveby(zero) 12:44, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- ProQuest has a preview of Beckwith's 1977 dissertation, which unfortunately ends mid-introduction to Ptolemy and Ammianus Marcellinus and Baetae. For Persians, Tubbat and 9th century Beckwith, Christopher (1989). "The Location and Population of Tibet According to Early Islamic Sources". Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 43 (2/3): 163–170. JSTOR 23657789.
- Yeah, but the chronologies don't match up. The Tibetan Empire and the Ancient Persian and Greek polities didn't coexist on earth. It would be like asking "What did Byzantine Empire think about the U.S.?" --Jayron32 11:19, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- However, the original questioner mentioned the Tibetan Empire..., AnonMoos (talk) 18:53, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- Beckwith, Christopher (1987). The Tibetan Empire in central Asia. p. 7. has Ptolemy's Βαῖται and Bod as an ethnonym, but Tibet#Names has uncited : The Tibetan name for their land, Bod (བོད་), means 'Tibet' or 'Tibetan Plateau'. Also Zeisler, Bettina (April 2021). "The Call of the Siren: Bod, Baútisos, Baîtai, and Related Names" (PDF). Revue d'Etudes Tibétaines (60). fiveby(zero) 01:54, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, Jayron32 already had Ptolemy, here's a link to Periplus Maris Erythraei. Beckwith and Zeisler are more recent and accepting than the quote from Rolf Stein, but can't find a full copy of Étienne de La Vaissière's "The triple system of orography in Ptolemy’s Xinjiang" for the dissent. fiveby(zero) 02:20, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
What does Genetic science says about Tibetans?
Existence of Tibetan political state is different question. But has it been guessed by Genetic science since when Tibetan evolved some distinct features to make life breathable?
I know this question should go ideally in science forum but since already a topic is being discussed I prefered to ask here.-- Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookku (talk o contribs)
- This paper and This paper looks like an excellent start on your research. --Jayron32 12:02, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- We have an article on High-altitude adaptation in humans... -- AnonMoos (talk)
American casualties in WW2
Help me understand, as I understand it, the United States lost 405k military (161k in the war with Japan, 200k in the war with Germany and 40k in continental America who died of wounds). But the US lost 79k missing in action. There's a column in the State Department records called "declared dead," which I take to be missing persons whose death has been confirmed. But the remaining 73k missing are counted among the dead or are they counted separately? And is the Pacific front the most bloody for the United States? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.145.61.199 (talk) 09:05, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
What was before Tower Hotel?
What was on the site of Tower Hotel, London before Tower Hotel? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 22:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- St. Katherine's Church and St. Katherine's Square?[9][10] fiveby(zero) 22:55, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- Construction began in 1970, and St Katharine Docks#Closure and redevelopment says the docks were closed in 1968, and
most of the original warehouses around the western basin were demolished and replaced by [...] the bulky Tower Hotel
. So that makes it sound like the answer is warehouses. Card Zero (talk) 23:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- (ec)The hospital was demolished to make way for docks: St Katharine Docks#History, and warehouses later demolished for the hotel according to St Katharine Docks#Closure and redevelopment. fiveby(zero) 23:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- A vineyard till the 1147 establishment of the hospital, and a Starbucks
now called "the coronarium" in homage to the hospital(the coronarium until 2000, now a Starbucks) according to Cox. fiveby(zero) 23:16, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- A vineyard till the 1147 establishment of the hospital, and a Starbucks
- Splendid, thank you both @Fiveby: and @Card Zero:. I found this aerial photo from 1934 with a large warehouse on the hotel site. DuncanHill (talk) 00:34, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
March 31
Were Robert Seymour Conway, Liberal candidate for the Combined English Universities in 1929, and Martin Conway, Unionist candidate for the Combined English Universities in 1929, related? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 00:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- According to our articles Robert Conway was born in Stoke Newington, and his father was a Congregationalist minister, Samuel Conway (according to the article about his sister Katharine Glasier). Martin Conway was born in Rochester and his father was William Conway (also a minister, but presumably Anglican). So they do not seem to be related, no. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:38, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- None of that precludes them being related. DuncanHill (talk) 14:09, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- How far back do you want to go, to determine whether they are 'related'? AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:21, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- I was using the word in its everyday, not its ferociously pedantic, sense. Was there a relationship of which they were, or would have been likely, to be aware - eg cousinage of varying degree, or "Oh yes, we're both descended from n or m Conway". The sense in which everybody who isn't a RefDesker understands it. DuncanHill (talk) 14:28, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- It's also worth pointing out that Conway (surname) is a fantastically common name, with several different origins (either Scottish or Irish); maybe not "Smith" or "Jones" level common, but common enough that I would, myself, never presume that two random Conways were related in any meaningful way. When I hear "professor Conway", my mind goes to John Conway before anyone else, and I don't know that he has any relation to either of the above professors Conway. Just as a data point, This random, non-comprehensive genealogy website has over 200,000 individuals named Conway in their database. In the U.S. alone, there were over 40,000 Conways in the 2000 and 2010 censuses:[11]. --Jayron32 16:16, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- I've never heard of your Professor Conway, and I can't say I've ever even met a Conway. But there you are. DuncanHill (talk) 16:40, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- It's also worth pointing out that Conway (surname) is a fantastically common name, with several different origins (either Scottish or Irish); maybe not "Smith" or "Jones" level common, but common enough that I would, myself, never presume that two random Conways were related in any meaningful way. When I hear "professor Conway", my mind goes to John Conway before anyone else, and I don't know that he has any relation to either of the above professors Conway. Just as a data point, This random, non-comprehensive genealogy website has over 200,000 individuals named Conway in their database. In the U.S. alone, there were over 40,000 Conways in the 2000 and 2010 censuses:[11]. --Jayron32 16:16, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- I was using the word in its everyday, not its ferociously pedantic, sense. Was there a relationship of which they were, or would have been likely, to be aware - eg cousinage of varying degree, or "Oh yes, we're both descended from n or m Conway". The sense in which everybody who isn't a RefDesker understands it. DuncanHill (talk) 14:28, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- How far back do you want to go, to determine whether they are 'related'? AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:21, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- None of that precludes them being related. DuncanHill (talk) 14:09, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Anyway, I didn't find much except that the Reverend William Conway has a monument in St Margaret's, Westminster. The other one's dad, Samuel Conway, was a leading light in the founding of the Congregational Memorial Hall in Farringdon Street, London [12]. Given the tribal nature of religion in Victorian England, it seems a little unlikely that they were closely related, but if so, it would have made for an uncomfortable Christmas Dinner. Alansplodge (talk) 15:04, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. What triggered my question is that I know David Lloyd George wrote to Martin Conway shortly after the election, saying (amongst other things) that he was sorry that the other Conway wasn't elected as well (it was a two member seat, Martin Conway (nominally Unionist but would have stood as a Liberal if asked) and Eleanor Rathbone (an Independent) were elected, the other Conway came third, and another Unionist came fourth). If the Tories hadn't put up two candidates it's quite possible both Conways would have got in. DuncanHill (talk) 16:40, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- That may have also been Lloyd George noting the two unrelated Conways as a happy coincidence. I'm reminded of the band Duran Duran, which was once 60% surnamed Taylor, all of whom were unrelated... --Jayron32 17:17, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. What triggered my question is that I know David Lloyd George wrote to Martin Conway shortly after the election, saying (amongst other things) that he was sorry that the other Conway wasn't elected as well (it was a two member seat, Martin Conway (nominally Unionist but would have stood as a Liberal if asked) and Eleanor Rathbone (an Independent) were elected, the other Conway came third, and another Unionist came fourth). If the Tories hadn't put up two candidates it's quite possible both Conways would have got in. DuncanHill (talk) 16:40, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Is Meena Aryan or Dravidian?
Is Meena Aryan or Dravidian? -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 09:41, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- According to fr:Meena, Aryan. --KnightMove (talk) 15:23, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- ... which means they speak (several of a large variety of) Indo-Aryan languages; for example, the Meena in Mewat are likely to speak Mewati, and so on. -- 15:38, 31 March 2022 Lambiam
- @KnightMove: Ji, But this source is telling them Dravidian people.[1] -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 01:23, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- No it isn't. "Early views of the Minas held that they were among the oldest inhabitants of the region and represented pre-Dravidian elements in the population." "Minas, depending on where they live in Rajasthan, speak various dialects of Rajasthani, which itself is a regional variant of Hindi." --KnightMove (talk) 02:26, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- @KnightMove: Please tell me on the basis of this website.[2] -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 18:21, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Look at this book at 130 and tell what is written in it?[3] -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 19:05, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Well, I honestly don't care. --KnightMove (talk) 03:42, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- @KnightMove: You haven't answered my question. Aryans or Dravidians? -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 04:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- The trouble with this desk is not that people don't care to answer questions but remove the answers, leading to days of pointless discussion. Readers don't know this is happening because they don't check the history. For example, someone answered this question two hours after it was asked, but "Viennese Waltz" removed the answer without explanation one minute later. This same "Viennese Waltz" did this to me as well yesterday. You can recover the academic paper resolving your query by checking the history (the answer was posted at 11:47 Thursday). @Karsan Chanda: 2A00:23A8:4015:F500:5875:5A25:6319:EA26 (talk) 14:30, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Look at this book at 130 and tell what is written in it?[3] -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 19:05, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- @KnightMove: Please tell me on the basis of this website.[2] -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 18:21, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
References
Would that be worthy of an article?Ericdec85 (talk) 10:56, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- I think this is a recent coinage by Brian Klaas. Could be worth adding to that article as a section, and creating a page as a redirect to that same article. Card Zero (talk) 11:20, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- The article by Klaas is cited in the section Illusion of control § Occurrence. However, the term "dictator trap" has also been used for the degeneration of an initially benevolent exercise of power into corruption, cronyism and nepotism.[13] The trap identified by Klaas is not the only possible dictator trap. Another one (which can also refer to Putin) is getting trapped in an information bubble, an echo chamber of yes men. --Lambiam 15:58, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- As far as I can tell, all we have is WP:NEOLOGISM-type stuff. It's not even a concept with a consistent definition, never mind one that has entered into wide enough use to even begin to think about developing a proper encyclopedia article about. --Jayron32 16:04, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- The article by Klaas is cited in the section Illusion of control § Occurrence. However, the term "dictator trap" has also been used for the degeneration of an initially benevolent exercise of power into corruption, cronyism and nepotism.[13] The trap identified by Klaas is not the only possible dictator trap. Another one (which can also refer to Putin) is getting trapped in an information bubble, an echo chamber of yes men. --Lambiam 15:58, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
April 1
What does 'cultural pathology' means?
I did come across terms 'cultural pathology', 'Culturopathy' and 'Culturopath'.
- Are those related terms to each other,
- What do those mean ?
- Relationship with Irrational beliefs, if any?
Thanks Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 06:13, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- You may find this interesting:[14] --<-Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots-> 06:36, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Bookku -- In the United States, the concept of cultural pathology was popularized by the Moynihan report (though I'm not sure whether it used that exact phrase). To my mind, a more valid example is the society explained in the book "The Moral Basis of a Backward Society"... -- AnonMoos (talk) 07:01, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- In medical jargon, -path, -pathy, and -pathology all refer to diseases (see [15]), from the Greek meaning "to suffer". (the ending also appears in terms like "empathy" and "sympathy", meaning roughly "to suffer with" and "to suffer alongside"). In the medical sense, you see terms like "neuropathy", meaning "disease of the nerves", for example. When I do a google search for your terms, they all seem to relate, in a metaphorical sense, to the medical uses, so something that is "culturopathic" is a "diseased culture", and it seems to refer to harmful cultures or cultural practices. See, for example, [16] "
We can use the term 'culturopathic' to describe any culture that results in harm
", or [17] "Culturopathy is the "pathology" of an intersubjective system. When individuals or groups of people experience pathology in their social dimension
". Since pathology is the study of the causes and effects of disease, the term "cultural pathology" seems to be used to indicate "the study of diseases of a culture", which is to say the attempt to diagnose the causes and effects of harmful practices within a culture, a very closely related term, "Social pathology", is defined here in ways that I am seeing the term "cultural pathology" used in various Google searches (though I can't find an overt definition.) --Jayron32 12:19, 1 April 2022 (UTC)- I'm fairly certain you meant "medical" jargon, but medial does make for an amusing typo as it ties in to your later points (and onward to pathologization). Matt Deres (talk) 15:35, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I think these terms have no precise meaning. By equating an aspect of a culture to a sickness, people who use terms like cultural pathology or culturopathy do so to flag it as something one should condemn. It is a form of swearing using printable words. A culturopath would be a person who is culturally aligned with a culturopathy. --Lambiam 12:31, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
African countries and death penalty and Islam.
I'm looking at death penalty in Africa, and Egypt it a big player for the death penalty. The countries that still have the death penalty appear to be Islamic countries to me. Just out of curiosity, what Islamic countries are against the death penalty? Even outside of Africa? And, I imagine you can't define all countries as 100% Islam or not, so could there be African countries against the death penalty but are only partially Islamic? (Not an April Fool's joke question.). 67.165.185.178 (talk) 10:28, 1 April 2022 (UTC).
- Well there isn't any Capital punishment in Albania. There's a short discussion at Capital punishment in Islam#Capital punishment in Muslim-majority nations, and Muslim world gives you demographics to help you decide what you want to call an Islamic country. Card Zero (talk) 11:22, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Morocco is another example. I suggest you take a look at Capital punishment by country. Shantavira|feed me 11:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I was also fascinated with jurisdictions that recently decided to bring back the death penalty. Afaik, that has never happened in the U.S. states before. But I saw this in the chronology excerpt article: "Where a country has abolished, re-instated, and abolished again (e.g. Philippines, Switzerland, Portugal, Italy) only the later abolition date is included. Countries which have abolished and since reinstated (e.g. Liberia) are not included."
So it looks like only 5 countries have decided to bring back the death penalty, but 4 of them got rid of if for a 2nd time. 67.165.185.178 (talk) 11:52, 1 April 2022 (UTC).
- If the bloodthirsty leader of a coup overthrowing the democratically elected government reinstates capital punishment, can one say then that "the country" decided to bring back the death penalty? --Lambiam 14:23, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- "The Country" means many different things, but in the context of "The country <has a certain law>" the context means "The state" and not "the population". Insofar as the leadership of a coup has taken control of the machinery of state and is acting as the government of said country, and is able to enforce their position as such, then in this context, that's "The country". Saying "Freedonia decided to bring back the death penalty" doesn't mean that all of the people collectively and with one mind made such a decision, it means "The state/government of Freedonia decided to", and insofar as a group of people has the power to enact and enforce such statutes, they are the de facto state/government of Freedonia. How they got that power (by election, by inheritance, or by force) may have some effect on how people feel about them, but the reality of their power doesn't change based on feelings. This is covered quite well in the wikipedia article Sovereignty. --Jayron32 15:48, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- I have no issue with a factual formulation like, "the country reinstated the death penalty". But if the verb "decide" is used, I find it less appropriate in such a situation to use "the country" as its subject. If the authoritative dictator exercising sovereignty suffered from indecisiveness-induced insomnia, one would also not write, "after many sleepless nights, the country decided ...". This issue is not dealt with in the article Sovereignty. --Lambiam 22:24, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- "The Country" means many different things, but in the context of "The country <has a certain law>" the context means "The state" and not "the population". Insofar as the leadership of a coup has taken control of the machinery of state and is acting as the government of said country, and is able to enforce their position as such, then in this context, that's "The country". Saying "Freedonia decided to bring back the death penalty" doesn't mean that all of the people collectively and with one mind made such a decision, it means "The state/government of Freedonia decided to", and insofar as a group of people has the power to enact and enforce such statutes, they are the de facto state/government of Freedonia. How they got that power (by election, by inheritance, or by force) may have some effect on how people feel about them, but the reality of their power doesn't change based on feelings. This is covered quite well in the wikipedia article Sovereignty. --Jayron32 15:48, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- 67.165.185.187 -- There was a pause in the U.S. due to Furman v. Georgia (1972-1976), after which some states brought the death penalty back... AnonMoos (talk) 14:59, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
What play did Margaret Lloyd George see several times?
In a letter dated 5th March, on 10 Downing Street notepaper, Margaret Lloyd George writes:
Dear Mr Grossmith,
Thank you so much for the chocolates last night. It was kind of you to send them. We thoroughly enjoyed the play. I have seen it several times, and we often hear it on the electro phone here in Downing Street.
With renewed thanks from me & my daughter & son & future daughter in-law all in the box last night
Yours v sincerely
M. Lloyd George
I would like to know the play! We can narrow things down a bit: Now, the Lloyd Georges moved into No. 10 in December 1916, and left in October 1922. George Grossmith died in 1912, so Mr Grossmith must be his brother Weedon Grossmith, who died on the 14th June 1919. I would think the daughter will be Olwen, and the son and future daughter in-law Richard and Roberta, who were married on 7 April 1917. Gwilym was not married until 1921. So I think that gives us March 1917. The electro phone was an apparatus for listening to plays, concerts, church services, and the like, over the telephone line. I rather think that Grossmith was the lessee of Terry's Theatre at the time, so it is possible that he wasn't actually in the play. So - can anyone name the play? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 15:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- There's George Grossmith Jr., who co-wrote The Bing Boys Are Here which played at the Alhambra on Saturday March 3rd 1917 - or at least that's what I make of the following bad OCR from The Stage published on the first of March: "The Otter Bmg Boys . Mr . Oswald StolJ will presenit Grossmith and Laurillard ' s revue , ' The Bihg Boys , on Saturday crrcning". I suppose this is wrong because it was a revue, and thus too lowbrow and musical to call a play. (Also because the 3rd is not the 4th and thus is not "last night".) Card Zero (talk) 16:14, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- You might play with the British Newspaper archive advanced search. For example, trying the keywords Weedon Grossmith, setting the publication place to London and the date from March 1 to 4, 1917, I found this snippet from the Daily Mirror for March 3 under “London Amusements”: “... IRENE VANBRUGH as Norali Marsh. Matinee, Thursdays and Saturdays. at 2.30. LAYHOUSE. 2.30 and 8.30. THE MISLEADING LADY. Weedon Grossmith, Malcolm Cherry. atinees. Thursday and Saturdays, at 2.30. (Ger. 3 9701 UEEN'S, W. THE DOUBLE EVENT. A New Four-Act ...”. Don’t have subscription though, for actual article you’ll need WP:RX. The Misleading Lady is mentioned in Weedon Grossmith’s article. (didn’t try George) 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Malcolm Cherry and Gladys Cooper in The Misleading Lady, "is whimsically declared to be amusing just because it is crude. Yet it is impossible not to like The Misleading Lady". 46.102.221.177 (talk) 17:17, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- George Grossmith Jr changes our timeframe - it could then be any 5th March from 1917 up to and including 1921. Indeed "son and future daughter in-law" would make sense for Gwilym and Edna 1921 (they married in June). That was a Saturday, so last night would be a Friday. Thinking about it, a Sunday in wartime does seem unlikely for Margaret to be going to a show. In 1921 George Jr was in partnership with Edward Laurillard at (I think) the Apollo, the Shaftesbury, and the Winter Garden. By 1921 Olwen was in India (and indeed gave birth to Eluned on the 3rd March) so the daughter would have been Megan. DuncanHill (talk) 19:00, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Right, same archive search for George Grossmith in London in the first five days of March 1921 returns The Naughty Princess: "THE NAUGHTY PRINCESS. tJ W. H. BERRY. Lily St. John. Amy Augarde. GEORGE GROSSMITH. Nightly, at 8. Mats. Wed. Sat., at 2". Better? 70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ah thank you! Yes, that looks good. DuncanHill (talk) 19:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Very fun question! 70.67.193.176 (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ah thank you! Yes, that looks good. DuncanHill (talk) 19:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Right, same archive search for George Grossmith in London in the first five days of March 1921 returns The Naughty Princess: "THE NAUGHTY PRINCESS. tJ W. H. BERRY. Lily St. John. Amy Augarde. GEORGE GROSSMITH. Nightly, at 8. Mats. Wed. Sat., at 2". Better? 70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- George Grossmith Jr changes our timeframe - it could then be any 5th March from 1917 up to and including 1921. Indeed "son and future daughter in-law" would make sense for Gwilym and Edna 1921 (they married in June). That was a Saturday, so last night would be a Friday. Thinking about it, a Sunday in wartime does seem unlikely for Margaret to be going to a show. In 1921 George Jr was in partnership with Edward Laurillard at (I think) the Apollo, the Shaftesbury, and the Winter Garden. By 1921 Olwen was in India (and indeed gave birth to Eluned on the 3rd March) so the daughter would have been Megan. DuncanHill (talk) 19:00, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
April 2
Is there anyone notable with a negative view of world government?
The world government article says "World government has both supporters and detractors from across the political and ideological spectrum", yet so far as I can see it doesn't specify any detractors. It lists a series of people who seem either resigned to the inevitability of world government (whether under fascism, communism, or as a federation) or positively joyous about it. I don't see so much as a note of caution anywhere in the article, have I not read closely enough? Card Zero (talk) 00:08, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Right-wingers in the U.S. have railing against evil plots to establish an oppressive world government for many decades. Almost everybody who supports a United States withdrawal from the United Nations thinks world government would be a bad idea. See also New World Order (conspiracy theory)... AnonMoos (talk) 00:19, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure whether they would oppose the creation of a global United States. Card Zero (talk) 00:44, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- That seems rather irrelevant -- whether a U.S. government which expanded to the whole globe allowed people outside the current 50 states to vote or not, the result would be a very different system than the U.S. as it exists now. Most of the people who want to withdraw from the United Nations are somewhat nostalgic for the U.S. relationship to world affairs as it existed before WW2, when the U.S. could to a significant degree shelter behind the two oceans -- and your scenario is the exact opposite of that... AnonMoos (talk) 11:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- That sounds like isolationism, and not like a principled concern about the effects of world government on the world. Card Zero (talk) 12:09, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- That's nice -- you didn't ask about people who oppose a world government for one specific reason, so I answered the question you originally asked. AnonMoos (talk) 23:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for an entirely valid answer, it's just that I didn't think adding isolationists to the article would do much to balance it. (Let alone conspiracy theorists.) I mean, if they have a reasoned opinion about world government, rather than mere nostalgia for a comfortable domestic situation, then yes. Card Zero (talk) 09:16, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Many of them would call themselves Paleoconservatives, though some might not object to an isolationist label... AnonMoos (talk) 21:29, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for an entirely valid answer, it's just that I didn't think adding isolationists to the article would do much to balance it. (Let alone conspiracy theorists.) I mean, if they have a reasoned opinion about world government, rather than mere nostalgia for a comfortable domestic situation, then yes. Card Zero (talk) 09:16, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- That's nice -- you didn't ask about people who oppose a world government for one specific reason, so I answered the question you originally asked. AnonMoos (talk) 23:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- That sounds like isolationism, and not like a principled concern about the effects of world government on the world. Card Zero (talk) 12:09, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- That seems rather irrelevant -- whether a U.S. government which expanded to the whole globe allowed people outside the current 50 states to vote or not, the result would be a very different system than the U.S. as it exists now. Most of the people who want to withdraw from the United Nations are somewhat nostalgic for the U.S. relationship to world affairs as it existed before WW2, when the U.S. could to a significant degree shelter behind the two oceans -- and your scenario is the exact opposite of that... AnonMoos (talk) 11:50, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure whether they would oppose the creation of a global United States. Card Zero (talk) 00:44, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- In the UK, one of the principal gripes of Brexit supporters (again mostly on the right, but some on the left too) was that the EU was leading inevitably towards a United States of Europe. Presumably World Government would be even less acceptable, although as far as I can tell, it's not a live topic here. 46.102.221.177 (talk) 11:12, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Anarchists are also not enthusiastic about the idea. Any democratically governed polity may become authoritarian and even totalitarian, whether by a power grab or by the erosion of democratic sentiment. Can anyone offer an iron-clad guarantee that a world government cannot become stuck in brutal totalitarianism? Without such guarantee, I think anyone, whether left or right, should oppose the idea of a world government. --Lambiam 12:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Telling that we have "right-wingers" and anarchists so far opposed to a cast of supporters that runs from Dante to Roddenberry. Right there with you as to totalitarianism, but multilateralism and unilateralism are equally good reading all considered. We'll soon be talking "end of history" and WP:Recentism. fiveby(zero) 14:47, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- I found Kenneth Waltz and his Theory of International Politics. (If he was an anarchist, he was a very sober one.) "World government, according to Waltz, would not deliver universal, disinterested, impartial justice, order or security, but like domestic governments, it would be driven by its own particular or exclusive organizational interests, which it would pursue at the expense of the interests and freedom of states. This realist view thus provides a sobering antidote to liberal and other progressive narratives that foretell peace through interdependence." Card Zero (talk) 16:45, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, didn't realize you were working on the article. John Mearsheimer, here's The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. You might do better starting with E. H. Carr The Twenty Years Crisis instead of dividing into proponents and opponents. "Liberals and Realists", "Realist Foreign Policy", and "Realism" from Oxford Bibliographies. fiveby(zero) 13:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- I found Kenneth Waltz and his Theory of International Politics. (If he was an anarchist, he was a very sober one.) "World government, according to Waltz, would not deliver universal, disinterested, impartial justice, order or security, but like domestic governments, it would be driven by its own particular or exclusive organizational interests, which it would pursue at the expense of the interests and freedom of states. This realist view thus provides a sobering antidote to liberal and other progressive narratives that foretell peace through interdependence." Card Zero (talk) 16:45, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Telling that we have "right-wingers" and anarchists so far opposed to a cast of supporters that runs from Dante to Roddenberry. Right there with you as to totalitarianism, but multilateralism and unilateralism are equally good reading all considered. We'll soon be talking "end of history" and WP:Recentism. fiveby(zero) 14:47, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Will Smith-Chris Rock slapping incident
Re: Will Smith–Chris Rock slapping incident. I am a little confused about this situation. I'd like to know if anyone can clear this up for me. Thanks in advance.
The latest update, in a nutshell, is this: Smith resigned his membership with the Academy; nonetheless, the Academy will continue its investigation to administer whatever discipline / sanctions it deems appropriate.
So, the Academy is a private organization. Will Smith is a private citizen, with absolutely no ties to the organization. (He is no longer a member; he resigned his membership.) What possible discipline or sanctions can an organization have in a scenario such as this?
In other words, how would a private organization (like, for example, the Academy) have any "jurisdiction" or "control" over any private citizen (like, for example, Will Smith)?
Since he is not a member of their organization, he does not have to abide by anything they say. There is nothing whatsoever that they can possibly do to him, as he has no relationship with them, and he -- as a private citizen -- is not "under their control" nor subject to any of their rules, decisions, discipline, sanctions, etc. Am I missing something? The whole thing makes no sense. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 06:08, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- The Academy has to follow due process. The fact that he has resigned doesn't relieve them of their responsibility to carry out disciplinary proceedings for violations of their standards of conduct. Just because they can't sanction him any more is no reason not to go through their internal procedures. I see it as similar to the situation when someone is sentenced to life imprisonment and then also convicted of some other crime for which they will serve their sentence concurrently. There's no additional penalty for the second crime, but that's no reason not to charge, prosecute and sentence them for it. --Viennese Waltz 06:32, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Joseph_A._Spadaro -- they could prevent him from attending or presenting at future awards ceremonies, or declare him ineligible to receive future awards. AnonMoos (talk) 11:53, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- They could, for example, demand that he give the Oscar statuette back. --←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:02, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- This appears to have been written before Smith resigned, [18]. AFAICT, only two of the possible specific punishments are precluded by Smith resigning; expulsion and suspension. Although I'm not sure if service and volunteer roles require you to be a member of the Academy, it's possible they do so his resignation already preclude that but maybe they don't. As AnonMoos said, he could be excluded from ceremonies (and other events or activities) and from future awards or honours. A notable point is that Smith would normally present the best actress award next year. As for BB's point, it's another possibility albeit suggested as unlikely. One thing not specifically clarified is whether the Academy can demand the statue is returned with some legal backing. I suspect they can, but either way they can at least revoke the award. On the expulsion and suspension point, while it isn't specifically mentioned it seems likely whether under expulsion/suspension or the exclusion thing or “other sanctions that the Academy in its sole discretion may deem appropriate”; Smith could be temporarily or permanently banned from the Academy i.e. could not rejoin even if he wanted too. Note the fact that Smith was a member of the Academy during the whole thing may further complicate things, see for example this fairly unrelated and old (i.e. possibly out of date) legal case surrounding whether a fine issued by a union to someone who was a member at the time but left to avoid paying it, is legally enforceable [19]. (Edit as I also wrote below, I'm not suggesting this is a likely punishment, it might not even be possible given the Academy's constitution etc. But the OP's question seem generalised asking about what an organisation could do about someone who is no longer a member but was when when the events of the disciplinary proceeding happened.) Nil Einne (talk) 17:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- I did not even think of the "tradition" whereby the Best Actor winner of the prior year presents the Oscar to the Best Actress winner of the following year. Wow, that will be awkward at the 95th ceremony next year. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:21, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Given recent history I should emphasise the Academy is well known for being not a union indeed it was initially anti-union. Also while researching this answer I found out that the SAG-AFTRA has also opened disciplinary proceedings into Will Smith. However my answer is not a comment on them in any way, I avoided opening any of the many links I came across even though it's possible they would have helped since I wanted to avoid any suggestion I was talking about Will Smith and the SAG-AFTRA or any other union.
Fines aside, the limits of what unions can do is perhaps a useful comparison as to what sanctions an organisation can legally do which may affect a non member. I vaguely recalled reading during some entertainment strike in the US that even non union strike breakers were affected. I thought I read they might be prevented from working on future union productions but after a lot of research I'm fairly sure this is wrong.
A union may forbid someone from joining the union and some unions did say they would do so to non members [20], or alternatively ban them for a certain period [21]. But even for a union shop beyond the loss of any union benefits the most that is supposed to happen in terms of future job prospects, is they still have to pay the dues or even only the parts related to collective bargaining etc while not being part of the union. Note that the union shop is fairly universal among unions in the entertainment field in the US and the most you get since the closed shop is forbidden under the Taft–Hartley Act. Anyway if they pay what's needed, at least theoretically, they aren't supposed to be discriminated against because they aren't part of the union etc. See [22] which while an anti-union site concurs with our messy extremely pro union Financial core, [23] and other things I've read.
The fi-core is extremely controversial in the entertainment field as it allows people to work on union jobs while also working on non-union jobs something prevented by most entertainment unions in states without right to work laws, see e.g. [24]. Mostly this relates to people who join the union and then leave under the fi-core system, but AFAICT, this applies to those who were never members because they're not allowed to join, and those who leave for other reasons or are banned after joining, so I'm fairly sure Deadline is right here [25]. (As per the NRTW site and my earlier link, they may still be subject to disciplinary action for stuff they did while members.)
However one thing I wasn't able to definitely answer is whether unions can effectively black list someone for reasons unrelated to their membership [26]. There is the infamous albeit very old Hollywood blacklist, and more recently Harvey Weinstein was said to have black listed people for illegitimate reasons, which implies that there must be legitimate ones.
In other words, can an organisation require that their members don't work with a person under possibly penalty of themselves being subject to disciplinary proceedings? Both before and after research, the answer seems likely to be "it depends on why, their constitution, etc". (To be clear I see no chance the Academy or for that matter the SAG-AFTRA will forbid members from working with Will Smith. My point wasn't the chance of this happening, but instead on what powers an organisation may have against someone who isn't a member.)
My initial reaction -- when I heard the news of Smith's resignation was this. Smith knew that -- pretty much -- the worst that they (the Academy) could do was to expel him or to suspend him of his AMPAS membership. Once he's not a member (i.e., if he were to resign), they (AMPAS) don't have a lot of options to "discipline" a non-member. So, he resigned ... almost as a cagey, sneaky, clever, pre-emptive strike ... to "de-fang" the Academy of its most serious possible consequences. That was my thinking. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:27, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Can I resubmit it?
Draft:Meena-Mina controversy -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 10:05, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- You've posted your question in the wrong place. This page is for general knowledge questions, you want Wikipedia:Help desk. --Viennese Waltz 10:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- What about Eena and Mo? --←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:02, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Muscovite–Novgorod wars
What is the common English name, if any, for the 15th-century conflict between the Grand Duchy of Moscow and the Novgorod Republic? The Russian wiki has Московско-новгородские войны (Muscovite–Novgorod wars), but this doesn't appear to be a thing in English-language sources. I also checked the related Battle of Shelon and Marfa Boretskaya, but none names the war. Brandmeistertalk 14:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Here's a 1967 journal article on "The Fate of the Novgorodian Republic" which calls the conflict "a number of military campaigns". Our article Novgorod Land says "Ivan III launched his first campaign against Novgorod in 1471", but Vasily the Blind's attack on Novgorod in 1456 should also be part of the thing you're trying to name. The term campaigns has some precendent, anyway. (Compare Livonian campaign against Rus'.) Something like "Russian campaigns against Novgorod" sounds reasonable to me, if it's correct to say Russian in this context (maybe Muscovian instead?) Card Zero (talk) 15:24, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Part of the "Gathering of the Russian Lands" or Ivan III/Muscovite "conquest of Novgorod" seem the most common. You looking for an article title, or a descriptive phrase in other article content? fiveby(zero) 15:43, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm looking for an article title. Brandmeistertalk 07:38, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- There does not appear to be a specific en.wikipedia article about said war. Parts of it are covered in articles such as Territorial evolution of Russia, the aformentioned Novgorod Land article, Ivan III of Russia#Territorial expansion, and Novgorod Republic#Fall of the Republic. --Jayron32 15:44, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm looking for an article title. Brandmeistertalk 07:38, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
Psychology of Russian soldiers in Ukraine
So far, I have always had the understanding that the bulk of the Russian troops in Ukraine are young kids from the countryside who, blinded by propaganda, don't know any better. Now, in this article from a reliable German source (sorry that it's behind a paywall) I read that they are employing a number of practices, such as Double tap strike, which clearly violate even the most basic sense of humanity. (Yes, I know, there are signs of bad morale in the Russian troupes, but the majority still seems to support their Gröfaz (de).) I'm not writing this merely in order to vent my outrage - after all, coming from Germany, I am in no position to point the finger at other countries in this regard.
The goal of my question here is to reach some understanding. What is going on psychologically in these people? For the behavior of Nazi troops and concentration camp wardens, there are a number of concepts, such as xenophobia and racism, which can explain why they treated other human beings as animals, but these don't apply here, since Ukraine has been considered a "sister nation" for a long time. Sebastian 20:47, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- The majority of low-ranking cannon-fodder (especially in the northern areas of invasion) could be young recent recruits, while many of the higher-ups, or other personnel who have been in the Russian military for a long time, could be using in Ukraine tactics they previously used in Syria or Chechnya. There's not really a contradiction... AnonMoos (talk) 23:47, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Your answer seems to assume a surgically clear distinction between those that “use” the tactics (by which I suppose you mean “decide”) and those who execute them. Is there such an impenetrable class system in the Russian forces? ◅ Sebastian 09:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Don't forget that the oppressed Ukrainians are eager to welcome the Russian liberators but are held back from doing so by the fanatic genocidal neo-Nazis that fight against the heroic Russian army. Since only military sites are hit, pummeling them twice is only fair. --Lambiam 00:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- That's basically my question. If only a small fraction of the horrible pictures we have been seeing every day now is true, then there must be many soldiers who have seen the carnage inflicted on civilians. Or are you saying that people can be so indoctrinated that they can't distinguish a pram from a tank anymore? ◅ Sebastian 09:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- The ones firing the rockets or dropping the bombs are distant from the locations where their weapons inflict their damage. So are we (at least I), but we see these painful images on the TV. I think they do not. --Lambiam 12:12, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- That's basically my question. If only a small fraction of the horrible pictures we have been seeing every day now is true, then there must be many soldiers who have seen the carnage inflicted on civilians. Or are you saying that people can be so indoctrinated that they can't distinguish a pram from a tank anymore? ◅ Sebastian 09:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- "Do what I say or I will lock up/torture/kill you/your family" turns out to often be a good motivator. The Schutzstaffel put an emphasis on recruiting "family men" because they were judged to be more reliable in following orders. --47.147.118.55 (talk) 01:37, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- That may be a factor, but even so, in the end there should be – in a “special operation” that often has run out of control, where people on both sides are losing count of their dead, in a country where many people speak the same language – plenty of chances to escape the watchdogs without them knowing if you're dead or alive. Once people realize they're just cannon fodder for a fratricide, shouldn't the vast majority desperately seek such opportunities? ◅ Sebastian 09:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think we should be drawing a parallel with the SS unless we have a source (see Godwin's law). Some points:
- In all wars, it's necessary to portray the opponents as the "bad guys" and there is plenty of Russian propaganda claiming (possibly correctly) Ukrainian humanitarian violations during the prolonged fighting in the Donbas, which might be seen as justification.
- In every society, there are aggressive and violent people and these traits are encouraged to an extent by military training where they are sometimes necessary. Western armies go to a great of trouble to keep these carefully channelled, but maybe this isn't so much of a concern for the Russians, and it seems they have severe command-and-control issues on the battlefield.
- Just about every active army has been tainted with some major human rights breaches; Bloody Sunday, Mỹ Lai and Abu Ghraib spring to mind. Even the inoffensive Dutch have the Rawagede massacre and the Niš cluster bombing to their discredit. Alansplodge (talk) 09:06, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think we should be drawing a parallel with the SS unless we have a source (see Godwin's law). Some points:
- By way of a reference, The Psychology of War Crimes discusses why soldiers obey orders to mistreat people, but there may also be cases where the culture of an army (or a wider society) and a lack of supervision, encourages soldiers to commit war crimes on their own initiative, as at Abu Ghraib. Alansplodge (talk) 09:10, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, Alansplodge, those are good points that give me food for thought. I especially appreciate the bigger perspective you're providing with the references to other situations around the globe. Would you have an example where the belligerents were close enough to consider each other something like a sister nation? ◅ Sebastian 09:27, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe the American Revolutionary War or any civil war? ◅ Sebastian 09:42, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- It appears that nobody can come up with any comparable example, nor an explanation that leaves any chance to keep even an element of respect for the Russian side. At the same time we're seeing more and more extremely disturbing news in this matter. So it is with profound sadness that I am giving up any hope of contributing to peace by looking for the humanity of the perpetrators.
- I'm not saying that no such path exists. Possibly someone studying The Psychology of War Crimes might find one. But that would be an achievement worthy of a Nobel Price for Peace – way above my league. ◅ Sebastian 05:00, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- 'Humanity' and 'perpetrators' require exact definitions in this context and not any loose usage. In some senses the contribution to peace was made long ago, we do not "look" for the humanity of anyone, the very basis of liberalism is that we never deny it. fiveby(zero) 15:12, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- By way of a reference, The Psychology of War Crimes discusses why soldiers obey orders to mistreat people, but there may also be cases where the culture of an army (or a wider society) and a lack of supervision, encourages soldiers to commit war crimes on their own initiative, as at Abu Ghraib. Alansplodge (talk) 09:10, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
|
April 3
What has been said about Mina Tribe in this book? Please try to tell.
[1] -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 02:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
References
- You might get a quicker response at the French Wikipedia, as only a small proportion of responders on this English Wikipedia are likely to be both fluent French readers (thus able to translate to English accurately) and willing to take on such a not-inconsiderable task. Do you know if this Tribe is called "Mina" (or "Meena") in French, or something else? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.123.235 (talk) 06:47, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Page 128 in the book says: "Together With the Mhairs, Minas are half-savages from Rajputana. The two population are the links between the savage Bhils, and the Jâts, who are civilized. Together they number some several hundreds of thousand. Like the Bhils, they maintain fortified towns and hamlets. Many of them are "recruited" from outcasts from the Rajputs or the Jâts. They are today engaged in a fast accession to civilization. They are beginning to practice agriculture and they are adopting the brahmanic religion, but they still worship trees, stone altars, and iron, in the fashion of the Bhils. They adopted an hindi dialect, whereas Bhils from the inside are using a language similar to that of the Gonds." See Bhil people#History --Askedonty (talk) 10:03, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) In the caption of the photograph on page 131, as wel as elsewhere in the book, the Mina tribe is called a "half-savage tribe of Rajputana" (savage in the sense of not having a highly developed culture). In general, the discussion of the Mina is confined to Rajputana; they are mostly mentioned as one of three half-savage tribes of Rajputana, the Bhil, the Mhair and the Mina. (I cannot identify Mhair as any of the scheduled tribes.) The first mention is on page 86. The Mina are said there to occupy the Jaipur kingdom in the high Ganges basin, numbered 200,000 to 300,000. On pages 125 and 126 we read that while the "primitive element" dominates among the Bhil and is on equal footing with the "Turanian element" among the Mhair, the latter element dominates among the Mina. (These are old-fashioned racialist characterizations.) Page 128 tells us that the Mhair and Mina live in the Aravulli mountains in the heart of Rajputana, numbering several hundred thousand, where they build fortified villages. They may be ennobled by the admixture of the Rajputi and Jât races. Civilization is in rapid progress; they begin to cultivate the land and adopt Brahmanic worship. They speak a dialect of Hindi. --Lambiam 11:34, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia as a source of novelty
Is it known that any musicians, writers or scholars have been inspired in their work by Wikipedia?
Possibly even scientists?--2A02:908:426:D280:7100:3AFC:91AC:329B (talk) 10:58, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Various aspects of Wikipedia have been the subject of scholarly research, as in [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], and many more. Of course, there are references to Wikipedia in works of fiction ([43], [44], [45], ...), but in these contexts one can hardly call it a source of inspiration. --Lambiam 12:06, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Wikipedia: The Movie is coming out soon. The release date has had to be put back numerous times. The editing process has been a complete bitch. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 20:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- The song Newport (Ymerodraeth State of Mind) references Wikipedia --TrogWoolley (talk) 11:33, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- WHAAOE; see Wikipedia in culture for examples of the use of Wikipedia in song, film, writing, and MANY other places. --Jayron32 11:55, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
April 5
Will India face Sri Lanka, Lebanon, Venezuela type nightmare situation?
Every day, the cost of petrol, diesel, vegetables, cooking oil, medicines, and fertilizers is increasing in India.
Some are saying Modi is doing it intentionally.
- As stated at the top of this page, "We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate."--Shantavira|feed me 08:17, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Are there British people identifying with their Norman ancestry?
It seems to be not only a stereotype that English people, in so far as they somewhat root themselves in history, primarily identify with their Anglo-Saxon ancestry, while many other inhabitants of the British Isles identify as Celts. Are there also British people identifying with their Norman heritage? Maybe the remaining native speakers of Jèrriais and Guernésiais? Others? --KnightMove (talk) 05:20, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- Some British aristocrats used to be proud to trace their genealogy to medieval Norman ancestors, but any distinction between Normans and Saxons as separate social groups in England disappeared many centuries ago. By the way, there were 5 linguistic groups in medieval Scotland at various times: Britons ("P"-Celtic speakers), Gaels ("Q"-Celtic speakers), Picts, Norse-speakers, and English-speakers... AnonMoos (talk) 10:08, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- We have English surnames of Norman origin, but it's not a hot topic here as far as I know. Alansplodge (talk) 11:28, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- There also needs to be a distinction between "has Norman ancestry, and knows about it" and "Is ethnically Norman". The Anglo-Normans as an ethnicity doesn't exist anymore. There is no longer any Anglo-Norman culture within England for them to share amongst themselves. --Jayron32 12:19, 5 April 2022 (UTC)