Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Wikipedia Reference Desk covering the topic of humanities.

Welcome to the humanities reference desk.
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

  • Provide a short header that gives the general topic of the question.
  • Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Post your question to only one desk.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. All answers will be provided here.
  • Specific questions, that are likely to produce reliable sources, will tend to get clearer answers.
  • 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 are not a substitute for actually doing any original research required, or as a free source of ideas.

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.
Choose a topic:
See also:
Help desk
Village pump
Help manual

May 20

Name of 1624 papal bull?

According to the article at Urban VIII:

Pope Urban VIII issued a 1624 papal bull that made the use of tobacco in holy places punishable by excommunication;[1] Pope Benedict XIII repealed the ban one hundred years later.[2]

What was this bull called? Can I find its text, or an image of a copy, anywhere? It is not listed at List of papal bulls. HLHJ (talk) 00:41, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

One was for sale a few years ago here. DuncanHill (talk) 00:49, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not seeing it in List of papal bulls. The obvious title, had the Pope known, would have been Bull Durham.Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:05, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Should be Cum ecclesiae, but the date was 30 January 1642, not 1624. - Nunh-huh 01:18, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
To be pedantic, I don't think it's a "bull", which is a specific kind of papal document. In general usage everyone always seems to call everything issued by a pope a "bull"...our List of papal bulls also suffers from this problem. Cum ecclesiae appears to be just a plain old papal letter. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:27, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Is there an "official" list somewhere? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:47, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure...the Vatican website has lists of papal documents divided by pope but it only goes back to Leo XIII, which is not very far in papal terms. But the definition of "bull" and "letter" (and the more recent "encyclical" have changed over time, and initially a "bulla" is just the seal attached to the document, so something might be called a "bull" that is not exactly a bull in the modern sense. I haven't found a particular list but I'm sure there is one. I would be surprised if some dusty old 19th century German historian didn't make a list of them. There's probably something useful in the sources of our own List of papal bulls article, but our list itself is unreliable. Adam Bishop (talk) 23:36, 20 May 2018 (UTC)


  1. ^ Gately, Iain (2001). Tobacco: A Cultural History of How an Exotic Plant Seduced Civilization. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-8021-3960-4. 
  2. ^ Cutler, Abigail. "The Ashtray of History", The Atlantic Monthly, January/February 2007.

Aslan Verlag

Hi there, I have seen some books which are printed in the early 1900s from a publisher called Aslan and the place of print is - as the book says - in Grenzach-Wyhlen. I asked the government of Grenzach-Wyhlen (Germany) if they can tell me anything about the publisher Aslan, for example in which street he was based or when did he closed his publishing house, or when he started his business but the government told me, they have neither any information about this company neither ever registered any publisher called Aslan or Aslan Verlag in Grenzach-Wyhlen. Can somebody help me and find out anything about the publisher Aslan? It sounds a bit strange that the government of a city has no information about a publisher of over 100 books (when I google for "Aslan grenzlach-wyhlen" I am finding many references to books published by this comapny). Thanks! --Saegen zeugen des sofas jehovas (talk) 03:51, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

It is strange that a book printed in the early 1900s would use a town name that did not come into use until 1975: before that those were two separate towns (each significant enough to have their own railway station), and I would expect a printing works to be in one or the other. Wymspen (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm finding works published in the 1990s by this publisher. They all appear to be by one Mehmet Aslan. DuncanHill (talk) 12:40, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Could it be that some of the books are "re-prints" (ie books that were originally published in the early 1900s, by another publisher, and subsequently re-published by a modern company)? I also note that there is an Aslan Publishing Co. in the US (named after the CS Lewis character)... but that seems unrelated to this query. Blueboar (talk) 14:51, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
No, they include references to works published in the 1980s and 90s. DuncanHill (talk) 15:00, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
In this one there is an address in Grenzach-Wyhlen for Mehmet Aslan. (bottom of page 4). DuncanHill (talk) 15:02, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Why was the Grand Duchy of Lithuania so preposterously underpopulated?

Such a vast territory only had at most 3 million people according to Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The article refers to several devastating wars but it's not like devastating wars aren't a routine part of the pre-modern world. There must have been periods of stability in order for such a large area to be held together. So why was this place so underpopulated throughout its existence?

Muzzleflash (talk) 08:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Historical Demographics
Altar Domitius Ahenobarbus Louvre
Demographic history
Historical demography
World population estimates
List of Countries by Population
1600 1700 1800
That number is not particularly low compared to other contemporary regions; cf: List of countries by population in 1700. Note that the world population in 1750 was about 790M. —2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 14:16, 20 May 2018 modified:2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 06:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC) (UTC)2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 13:34, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
You also have to take into consideration the physical geography of the Grand Duchy... and ask whether it could have supported a larger population? The answer to that is "no". Much of historic Lithuania (comprising parts of modern Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, etc.) was either step-land or swamp... not really conducive to farming (and thus supporting large population centers) given the technology of the time. Blueboar (talk) 14:35, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Geography of Lithuania might be helpful in that regard (map shows mostly wetland and highland). —2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 15:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
See also List of countries by population in 1000 and Medieval demography. Alansplodge (talk) 19:12, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Geography of Belarus and Geography of Ukraine are actually more helpful in this regard. Much of the duchy's territory was known as the Wild Fields and was very sparsely inhabited for reasons listed in the article. --Ghirla-трёп- 12:47, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Muzzleflash -- I'm not sure where the 3 million figure comes from, but the eastern territories which were part of Poland-Lithuania during the late middle ages included large areas which were vulnerable to incursions of successive waves of steppe horse-nomads, from the Huns to (most destructively) the Mongols. The balance of military power didn't decisively shift from horse-nomads to settled agriculturalist communities until the 16th century. (Much of Russian history during the 16th and 17th centuries was concerned with mopping up various remnant "Hordes"/Khanates or political structures based on historic horse-nomad conquests, and opening up such areas to peasant settlement.) AnonMoos (talk) 21:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

May 21

How do illegal immigrants prove that a child is born in the US?

If an illegal immigrant family chooses to avoid hospitals because they are too costly, then they may give birth at home. And if they deliver the child at home, then they need documentation of the child's existence as a US citizen . . . to undocumented parents. If the parents show themselves to the authorities that their child is a US citizen, then wouldn't they simultaneously be discovered that they are illegal/undocumented immigrants? What if the US-born child has older, foreign-born siblings who also arrived illegally or got an expired visa? Will the US-born baby have to be deported along with the rest of the family? Or will the family be ripped apart, in which case the illegal immigrants get deported while the US-born baby gets adopted by American citizens? SSS (talk) 01:30, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

As to the last question, see Anchor baby. -- (talk) 01:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
This website gives some basic information about obtaining a birth certificate for unassisted home births. Midwives will help getting a birth certificate if they are involved. In California, the parents are not required to furnish citizenship information in order to register the birth of their child, but perhaps some states ask that. Normally, only the place of birth of the parents is asked. It is to the benefit of parents and the baby to register the birth. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Need someone who REALLY knows how British royal titles work.

On the talk page of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex‎ and in various sources that have no apparent expertise in this area, it has been claimed that there is such a person as "Princess Henry" in the royal family. This strikes me as being batshit insane. Does anyone know the exact rules for this sort of thing? --Guy Macon (talk) 04:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

This article attempts to explain it.[1]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:53, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
British_princess#Use_of_the_title_Princess_by_virtue_of_marriage. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Got it. Royal family naming rules really are batshit insane. I will now go back to pondering in what way Xena and Mulan are "princesses". --Guy Macon (talk) 05:25, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Mulan killed more people in one scene than were killed in the entire Rambo series. Do you want to tell her she can't be a princess? Iapetus (talk) 08:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
There was a time when Princess Michael of Kent was constantly in the headlines. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 08:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
And I'm sure "Out Val" could give Mulan a run for her money. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC) (p.s. also noted for her fine taste in jewelery).
As could Xena. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
It’s not any more insane than addressing someone as “Mrs John Smith” as that article mentions. And they don’t have last names so “Duchess Henry” is the only option if you’re being super old fashioned. Even my wife once received a letter for “Mrs. Adam Bishop” and she doesn’t even have the same last name as me. Stupid old traditions are hard to kill. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Someone should tell that Mrs Betty Mountbatten. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I suppose if we want to be consistent about such things, and yet all modern and non-sexist ... if Princess Charlotte of Cambridge gets married to a commoner, we should probably call her husband "Prince Charlotte of Cambridge". Blueboar (talk) 12:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

The old traditional rule was that if a woman owes an honorific to marriage, then it should not be added directly before her given (first) name. This applied to "Mrs", as well as to noble and royal stuff, so that an ordinary married woman would be known as "Mrs. John Smith", not as "Mrs. Mary Smith". In Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, "Lady Catherine de Bourgh" is known as such because she derives the "lady" honorific from being the daughter of an earl, while "Lady Lucas" (with the honorific before the surname) has her honorific from being married to a knight. In modern times, this explains why "Diana, Princess of Wales" was considered more correct than "Princess Diana". At the very top, "Queen" was an exception... AnonMoos (talk) 12:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea what connection the discussion below is supposed to have with anything in particular. "Queen" was an exception because it was prefixed to the first (given) name of a queen consort. If "Queen" followed the pattern of lower-level honorifics, then "Queen Mary" could only refer to a queen regnant... AnonMoos (talk) 10:05, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Not sure what a a British rock band has to do with it. Is that why that article says "Queen are" instead "Queen is"? Because of the royal "we"? --Guy Macon (talk) 16:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Queen are an example of notional agreement. DuncanHill (talk) 16:46, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Like saying "Manchester have won the EFL Cup" vs. "Philadelphia has won the Lombardi Trophy". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:30, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Of course, anybody who said the former would immediately be asked: "City or United?" (The third alternative (NB: not The 3rd Alternative or even The 3rd Alternative) would be too unlikely, at least for a few years, though I applaud the sentiment.) {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 00:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Note the singular plural about Coventry in World Forum/Communist Quiz. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Not sure why I need to, as I was in no way disagreeing on the subject of notional agreement, with which I entirely agree and habitually use, and was, following Guy Macon's initial joke, merely making a further joke (hence the small print) about the ambiguosity of referring to an English soccer team only as "Manchester". {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 16:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


Dear Editors,
I wrote a new article about Ms. Hanna Akiva, a disabled Israeli activist. I edited it until reference#13 (A clash with the police in Hertzliya). The rest was a machine translation, which has not been edited yet.
Is the article notable? The goal of the article is to describe the battle of the disabled vs the Israeli government from the viewpoint of Akiva, who was the most broadcasted person at this struggle. Thank you for your replies here. Dgw (talk) 08:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Just to be pedantic... Articles are never notable. What is (or is not) notable is the subject of the article (usually a person or an event). I don't know enough about Ms. Akiva to say if she is notable or not... but Wikipedia:Notability (people) should guide you. As for your goal... please read our WP:Neutral point of view policy. If your goal is to present things from a specific POV, you are going to have serious problems. If you are trying to "make a point", Wikipedia is not the right venue for that. Blueboar (talk) 12:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Hanna Akiva meets the WP:BASIC notability guideline of a person who has received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. References number 12 to 31 still need to be linked into the draft text. DroneB (talk) 12:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you DroneB for your reply and reading the article. After your reply, I would be glad to continue editing it from WP:NPOV, and thank you again. Dgw (talk) 14:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)


There has been a tremendous amount of argument in developed countries lately about refugees. The premise is generally that they are economic migrants who have crossed through many possible countries where they could have taken refuge, to get to one where they can make more money. As such they get a frosty reception from locals who see them as a force dragging their country down to the global average income.

The question is - do these intermediate countries where asylum is easy really exist? Who are they? I have read, for example, that Nicaragua was taking a lot of refugees, though they didn't make much money. I know that Jordan and Turkey took a tremendous number of Syrians, but I don't know how tolerably they were treated. But is there a global-scale perspective that says that yes, people seeking refuge can actually go somewhere easily to be safe? And is there any overall movement for wealthier countries to try to fund and organize destination countries that are providing refuge cheaply, so as to give the refugees other options? Wnt (talk) 14:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

If you're talking about the ones fleeing from Syria, isn't it more about survival, which is most basic of the hierarchy of needs? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The answer for Wnt is found at xenophobia. --Jayron32 15:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Let's try this again, more briefly: Are there countries where refugees (if able to reach them) can go and reliably, easily be able to live a safe and free life there, even if a poor one? If so, where? Wnt (talk) 18:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
No. There is absolutely no country with a 100% open immigration policy. All countries have some sort of stipulation on immigration. Therefore, if you ask your question about all refugees, there will be at least one refugee that can't get into whichever country to pick. (talk) 19:07, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
A place like Sealand might, but it has limited space. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:28, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
[citation needed] [2] doesn't exactly sound like an open immigration policy. It's actually far more restrictive than nearly every other country. Note also that although Sealand used to (I think) hand out passports [3] and for a fee still hands out identity cards [4], titles of nobility [5] and let you rent (they say own, but you only own it for 10 years and then have to renew) a square foot piece of land [6], AFAICT these don't affect your likely inability to visit Sealand. Nil Einne (talk) 09:02, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

May 22

Who is with Lloyd George

Can anyone identify the gentleman pictured here with David Lloyd George please? The picture is from the rear dustjacket of Frank Owen's Tumultuous Journey - Lloyd George his Life and Times. DuncanHill (talk) 01:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Just to be sure, have you checked to see if the photo also occurs inside the book? -- (talk) 02:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes I have. DuncanHill (talk) 09:14, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I sought, but found not. Sorry. Alansplodge (talk) 21:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Does the Greek sea god Triton have a counterpart in Roman mythology?

I can't find the answer to this on Google. Sphinxmystery (talk) 06:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Our article on Salacia, wife of Neptune, says they had three children. One of whom was Triton. So Triton is in both Roman and Greek mythology. The references for this fact are not online. Rmhermen (talk) 06:57, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
The German Wikipedia claims that the relationship of Neptune and Triton is "disputed". Apparently Neptune had an independent mythology in Latin and also Etruscan cultures (as Nethune), so that not all features of Poseidon were taken over when the two where later identified. No clear sources are given, though. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 07:00, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

What does this sign mean?

What does this sign mean? It looks like it's saying H2O-KT 5. What does that mean? Bus stop (talk) 07:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Avocado in Spanish is aguacate. H2O = water/agua. So, H20KT is a reference to avocados (KT is pronounced "kah tay" in Spanish). 5 would presumably be the price in Dominican pesos. I only got the hint when I found this old blog. clpo13(talk) 07:58, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
(After Edit conflict) I'm not sure where you found it, but that image is actually used in our Avocado article, with the caption "Selling avocados in Santo Domingo, DR". It was uploaded by User:Caballero1967. Maybe you could ask that user. HiLo48 (talk) 08:05, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I think that Clpo13 explained it fully and well. Caballero/Historiador 13:03, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
According to the Real Academia website, aguacate is derived from náhuatl ahuacatl. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:06, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Here's a funny little illustration.[7]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
And here's further info from EO.[8]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:10, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Wow—nice. Bus stop (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
So it's a kind of rebus. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:12, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for that reference. It is interesting that H2O needs no translation. Bus stop (talk) 12:52, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I suggest adding this explanation to the photo caption in avocado. (It's semi-protected, so I can't.) -- (talk) 13:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Done. Good idea. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks and thanks. Could you subscript the 2, please? -- (talk) 08:45, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Done. — Kpalion(talk) 15:21, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Schengen Area

A tourist from a developed country can do a four month long vacation in south-east asia: for example one month in Vietnam, one in Thailand, one in Philippines, one in Malaysia. Each of those countries allow 90 day long tourist visits to their country for citizens of most developed countries.

Pre-EU, a tourist can do a similar vacation in four different European countries, spending one month in each.

But after the establishment of EU and the Schengen Area, this is no longer possible as it is now the cumulative time spend in the Schengen Area that's counting towards the 90 days limit. This obviously hurts the EU tourism industry.

Has there been any hearings, proposals, or draft legislation in the European Parliament that deal with this issue? Or is this too niche of an issue for them to care about? (The number of tourists who can afford +90 days long vacations in the EU is probably small.) Mũeller (talk) 09:37, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

I would object to "obviously hurts" - I think the number of candidates would be very small. Moreover, they are probably all from New Zealand, and New Zealand has an exception ;-). More seriously, the few affected can just apply for a long-stay visum, or they pop over to Britain for a shopping trip and then re-enter Schengen. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Why just New Zealand? Australia to Europe flights probably aren't much less expensive. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
As I understand it, New Zealand had already individual agreements with all or most of the Schengen countries, including the former Eastern Block members. So they got a special rule. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:20, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
@Stephan Schulz Thanks for the input. The actual Schengen Area rule is "90 days out of 180 days", so popping out and back in again won't work. Mũeller (talk) 03:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
While you may be right on that point, I don't see what's stopping people applying for a long-stay visa. It's true that this involves a lot more work and could be denied and also doesn't allow free movement (as I believe the NZ exemption), but the nature of visas and visa-exemptions means they are always a balance of different demands. (I mean you can probably find one individual who would like to be a genuine tourist in the EU for 2 years and would be more likely to do it if they could and without all the hoopla that may be involved.) In this case, the maximum of 90 days would likely have been seen as the best balance of differing demands, especially as the likely small negative effect was likely seen as considerably outweighed by the benefit to tourism of having a single system and the reason for limiting it to 90 days (I presume to reduce the possibility of visa misuse). Nil Einne (talk) 07:04, 23 May 2018 (UTC)


WP:DENY.--WaltCip (talk) 13:10, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Is Christianity going to be a propaganda site or the historical reality of a false religion? For now it is propaganda. No Christian has ever established the existence of a human Jesus Christ. He is a literary creation. [1]Sahansdal (talk) 11:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

We do not predict the future here. (talk) 12:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Sahansdal apparently objects to the contents of the article Christianity. Wikipedia has a neutral point of view and should not claim that religious beliefs are true or false in articles about religion. Christianity makes a lot of formulations to show it is about the beliefs of the religion, e.g. these in the lead: "They believe that Jesus is the Son of God", "These professions of faith state that Jesus suffered, died, was buried, descended into hell, and rose from the dead", "The creeds further maintain that Jesus physically ascended into heaven". Jesus#Historical views and Sources for the historicity of Jesus discuss Jesus from a historical perspective. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


  1. ^

Quote origin

When I originally learned this quote (back in the 80s), it was attributed to Nietzsche, but I cannot find it documented anywhere. "Life is a vast black plain upon which blind brutes grope for rocks with which to crush the skulls of their fellows."

My google-fu has failed me. Can anyone confirm its origin? Tdjewell (talk) 12:21, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

The only Nietzsche quote I can find on "blind brutes" is "Such a change can begin only with individuals, for the masses are blind brutes, as we know to our cost." --Jayron32 17:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I looked for some possible original German language keywords for your quote at (digital critical edition of Nietzsche's complete works and letters), but found nothing even remotely fitting. (e.g. I searched "blind", "Schädel", "Steine" etc.) If Nietzsche did indeed write this, it should be findable there, maybe someone else will have more luck than I did ... ---Sluzzelin talk 18:22, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
There is something vaguely along those lines in a D H Lawrence Poem, "Know Thyself, and that Thou art Mortal." Wymspen (talk) 21:20, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Those Google links tell the world God knows what about your IP/MAC address/GPS/sexual orientation/etc. Plus, clicking on one got me straight to a "restricted page fuck off" result. But [9] (the same link cut after the first page number) gets me to a page I can read. Wnt (talk) 22:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Related: "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come." --Matt Groening, from before the time when The Simpsons became Zombie Simpsons (Google it). --Guy Macon (talk) 02:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

May 23

Is this bitcoin mining company using at least 1% of the electricity generated in China?

"Bitmain, a Chinese bitcoin miner and designer of chips, made $4bn last year" [10]

Bitmain's facility is in Dalad Banner, Inner Mongolia. They had a payroll of only 50 at that facility according to a NYT article in 2017. Considering the lack of overhead except for electricity and amount of profit, it's possible to imagine they consumed tens of billions of dollars of electricity in a year.

Was this one company using 1%+ of China's electricity last year?

Muzzleflash (talk) 13:01, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

You appear to be confusing a company that makes money selling hardware for bit`coin mining with a company that makes money mining bitcoins. Bitmain is both. You also appear to be confusing companies that do mining for themselves and companies that run mining pools. Bitmain does both, and "how much of the computing power is their hardware as opposed to others contributing their devices is unknown."[11] --Guy Macon (talk) 15:32, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
At the very least there is a huge facility in Inner Mongolia owned by Bitmain. And according to the Economist article most of Bitmain's earnings are from mining it does directly. This makes it possible to roughly assume the $4 billion profits figure is in the ballpark of what is earned by Bitmain from mining directly rather than selling hardware. Muzzleflash (talk) 22:43, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
The Economist has no way of knowing how much of the computing power is their hardware as opposed to others contributing their devices. Show me evidence of a power plant in Inner Mongolia capable of supplying 1%+ of China's electricity to one location and I will at least conclude that your theory is plausible. Right now you are making too many assumptions. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:24, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Maternity leaves

I have some questions regarding maternity leaves.

  • Do maternity leaves start before the childbirth? Has there been a time where the mother predicts inaccurately the baby's due date and thus, the baby comes out earlier or later than expected so the mother either has to give birth while at work or has to waste a couple of days of maternity leave?
  • Given that maternity leaves are about 3 months long, does that mean the new mother has to wean the child by the end of the 3 months?
  • Can the new mother extend the unpaid maternity leave a bit by consuming earned vacation leaves, extending another 3 weeks using paid vacation time? Alternatively, if the mother wants to breastfeed her young for a whole year or two, then she may exit the workforce and become a stay-at-home mother?
  • Suppose the mother wants to return to the workforce ASAP, because her husband doesn't make enough income to support the whole family. If she leaves the child at Grandpa and Grandma's house, then will the breastmilk stop producing during work hours? Or does the new mother have to keep track of time and make sure to wean the baby within 3 months?

SSS (talk) 21:09, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Please specify which country/jurisdiction you are asking about. The regulations and policies vary widely. Thanks! (talk) 21:13, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
The first two questions do not seem to be concerned with legal regulations and policies. The third question seems to be a local policy question, so that can be omitted. The last question seems more related to biology, whether human females would stop lactating anytime they wish. SSS (talk) 22:03, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. Maternity leave is strongly dependent on legal regulations and policies and local norms. In NZ paid parental leave is going to slowly increase to 26 weeks but the OECD average is 48 weeks. [12] Paid parental leave isn't quite the same thing as maternity leave since again, depending on location regulations, policies and norms, it may be possible for the father or some other caregiver to take some of that leave. But you mention 3 months which is clearly a short time in OECD terms considering that the former 18 weeks in NZ, which is longer than 3 months, was for good reasons considered short.

I suspect your source is referring to the US. It's often remarked that the situation in the US is quite limited especially for those in low-wage jobs [13] probably at least in part due to few legal requirements hence why Trump's proposal received some attention despite still being very limited [14].

With such a short period, it's reasonable that the mother may wish to take as much of it as they feel they can after the pregnancy rather than before. It's mentioned in my first source how the first 6 months are considered important by WHO guidelines implying that even with the future 26 weeks in NZ, there may still be a desire to minimise the time taken beforehand. And besides the parents wishes, again precisely when it can start will depend on local policies, regulations and norms.

As mentioned below, we're also talking about 'paid' leave here. Again unpaid leave may be an option but again how much of an option this is will depend on local policies, regulations and norms. Some jurisdictions may guarantee a period of unpaid leave. (I.E. It has to be offered on request with the job having to be held open probably with very limited exceptions.) Others may not, so it will depend on local norms and the specific employer. (Often large employers are better, but not always. To a point, a higher salary often also means better other conditions.) And there are all the additional complications like part time work, contract work and zero hour contracts.

You also mention paid vacation time. Again local regulations, policies and norms will influence how this interacts with any paid parental leave. Notably you mentioned 3 weeks but why? In NZ you're entitled to 4 weeks of annual leave in a simple situation [15] and as our article illustrates that's often the minimum (e.g. required in the EU) but some countries have 5 weeks or more. (5.6 weeks in the UK.)

Nil Einne (talk) 08:40, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

I would add that while not just a jurisdictional thing, age of weaning does tend to vary depending on several factors including local norms. Nil Einne (talk) 08:40, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
There's some more discussion of the situation in NZ here [16]. BTW I see you mentioned the mother returning to work because her husband (not sure why you assume she must have a husband) doesn't make enough. This makes me thinks you're only considering unpaid leave which isn't really the norm in a lot of the OECD further highlighting why your dismissal was wrong. For clarity, I'm not saying financial stress isn't possible since even in places with paid leave guarantees, it may not be the full salary or even close to it depending on the salary. E.g. in NZ the maximum is currently NZ$$538.55 a week before tax [17]. In the UK it's evidently even lower after 6 weeks £145.18 per week [18]. Still the aim of such schemes tend to be to reduce the chance that financial stress will force an early return and there may be topups from the employer again depending on local norms etc. Incidentally, while investigating the UK I made up this case [19] which gives some info on how things work in the UK including the guaranteed starting dates for leave for that scenario. I should also clarify that while sometimes the guaranteed leave may be shared in some fashion between parents, in other cases it may be a separate entitlement. Nil Einne (talk)
2. mother can express milk and put milk in the fridge
4. milk doesn't dry up when mother expresses milk
Sleigh (talk) 22:13, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
At the end of her maternity leave, the mother may have access to other forms of leave, such as long service leave, or leave without pay. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:39, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Regarding the milk issue, see breast pump. I have not met a mother who has not used one. It's fairly standard in the developed world for women to pump milk as needed; even when both my wife an I were at home, she would pump so there would be excess milk, so that I could handle night-time feedings and give her a rest for a bit. --Jayron32 11:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
I revise my question. Now, I just want to know whether or not women generally wean the infants at the end of the maternity leave (however long it takes, depending on local regulations). So, if the local regulation says 3 weeks, then the mothers have to wean at 3 weeks. If the local regulation says half a year, then the mother has to wean at half a year. But regardless of the local regulation, the mother has to wean the child off her milk when the maternity leave is up. Otherwise, wouldn't she produce milk during inconvenient work hours? SSS (talk) 17:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
" . . . wouldn't she produce milk during inconvenient work hours?" I myself (male) produce urine during work hours, but dealing with it is not a problem. SSS, You seem to have some peculiar notions about milk expression: it doesn't squirt out of its own accord according to a set timetable; it is mostly released when the nipple is stimulated by the suckling of a baby, or by the suction of an artifact such as a breast pump, which latter can be done in privacy if and as necessary. It is usually expressed involuntarily in any quantity only if neither of these methods are being used. Moreover, there is generally a transition period during which lactation tapers off; it doesn't normally stop abruptly (there is no effective and safe way of making this happen), because weaning an infant is itself a prolonged process of overlapping nutrition, not an instant change from milk to solid food. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 18:50, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
As far as I know, there are no laws mandating breast feeding for any length of time. Some women are unable to breastfeed, or find it very difficult to do so, and start babies on infant formula shortly after birth. Regarding age when weaning occurs, this page has a huge amount of data on the subject. --Jayron32 18:05, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
You appear to be labouring under some misapprehensions which admittedly the current terminology does not help. The World Health Organisation recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of an infant's life; to the best of my knowledge, this has always meant no other substance (water, formula milk, pablum, etc.) but I am not clear whether WHO means "only directly from the mother's breast". Some babies are fed by wet nurses (I worked on that article and yes, if you check the references, it is still - or once again - a thing). Some mothers exchange or sell their milk - not just to human milk banks but informally e.g. by eBay. And the word "wean" can mean different things to different people: are you using it to mean "cease lactating" or "cease bringing the baby to the breast"? It is certainly possible to feed an infant on nothing but the mother's milk, even if she is away at work. (See for example the US military's policy on breastfeeding as an active duty soldier.[20]) Jayron32 said above that all the mothers of his acquaintance use breast pumps; that is in my experience an American perspective[21]. The use of pumps is not widespread in many countries - here is some global industry data. US law, which grants its citizens the least maternity leave in the world, requires companies to provide lactation rooms for employees to pump, not places to which babies may be brought (as in other places and times). "Historian Jill Lepore argues that the "non-bathroom lactation room" and breast pumps generally are driven by corporate need for workers rather than mothers' wishes or babies' needs.[1]" You wrote "the mother has to wean the child off her milk when the maternity leave is up" - no, that's not the case. If the infant has begun to accept what are called "solid foods" (but are in reality mush), then a six- or nine- or twelve-month old can be breastfed morning and night (i.e. before and after the mother's work day) and eat "solids" and/or formula milk in between. The mother's milk production waxes and wanes in tandem with her infant's needs. It's like any other organ emptying and filling; think of stomachs and bladders. Adults plan around bodily functions and are not controlled by them. Breastfeeding isn't an all or nothing deal. Like a lot of human life, it's flexible. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 19:11, 24 May 2018 (UTC)


  1. ^ Lepore, Jill (12 January 2009). "Baby Food: If breast is best, why are women bottling their milk?". The New Yorker. Retrieved 29 December 2017. 

Sting credit card numbers - have they ever been tried?

I just got a call from the usual sort of scammer who has an apparently local number who tells me that they have an urgent message about my credit card account... I assume that if I stayed on the line, eventually I'd be presented with an opportunity to enter my credit card number, verification code, expiration date, etc., all in the name of "security". And then, ay caramba, a withdrawal might show up on the account! But I don't actually know because given I'm not going to give them a number there's no point to be made.

Still ... in theory, it should be possible to have a known invalid card number and data from some credit card company that, when all used together, causes them to give the appearance of a valid account, while they report that regrettably the credit limit is reached, server is temporarily down, some other excuse. While setting off an instant notification that the number is a scam and allowing the company to take some action. Of course, one could give a credit card number that fails the checksum scheme or otherwise doesn't exist, or is on some public list of sting numbers if it existed, but then scammers could look it up and know. Instead, it seems like an Irate Citizen would be best served by requesting his or her own special sting number from a company, then perhaps even submitting reports when they use it and with whom they shared it "just to confirm for security reasons".

Such a thing would seem in any given company's best interest ... but has it ever actually been implemented? Wnt (talk) 21:27, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

This was suggested five years ago in the FTC Robocall challenge.[22] You can do 90% of what you suggested with a prepaid credit card that has a couple of cents left on it.
Alas, it won't help. The way credit card theft works is that the crooks get a bunch of credit card nummers (and associated names, SS numbers, etc. if they can get them) then sell the entire set of stolen cards on the black market all at once. If they can, they sell the whole thing to a single customer. If the price isn't right, they sell sell them one at a time on the dark web. Once someone starts using the numbers, the clock starts as the credit card issuing banks begin investigating. Once they've identified where the breach occurred they figure out when the crooks started stealing the data, make a list of all potentially stolen cards, notify the customers, and disable the stolen cards. The stolen cards are now worthless. This all happens way faster than you can submit a report. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:53, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
  • It might be better to have a government-operated sting operation that creates bogus customers using bogus names and real credit card numbers. When called by a scammer, provide the info and then do a real-time traceback when the scammer uses the number. Same for e-mail scammers. -Arch dude (talk) 23:24, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

On a much more basic level, I got a call about ten years ago which started "I'm from Cardholder Services--". Since I didn't have any cards at that point, I took great pleasure in interrupting the call right there, saying "I don't have any cards, so I know you're lying", and immediately slamming down the phone... SFriendly.gif -- AnonMoos (talk) 07:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

May 24

Anti-fraud laws and magic

Do anti-fraud laws cover magic that only steals from society a tiny amount of inflation? They don't have to but if they aren't lawyery enough one could argue that putting a fake gold nugget into the Indian in the Cupboard cabinet and selling it wouldn't be fraud since it's real gold. Is it allowed to ask a genie to make you win a huge bet at a casino? Is it illegal to ask a genie for tomorrow's lottery numbers? Or just to win money with them? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

As per our article, magic is a performing art designed to entertain by staged tricks or illusions. And as per our other article, inflation is a sustained increase in price levels over a period of time. Did you have a serious question? DOR (HK) (talk) 16:52, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
If he does, it will be his first. --Jayron32 17:41, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes but when I see fiction I sometimes notice a character could've used their powers or magical object or wish quota to make gold, transmute to it or duplicate anything. And then wonder if the laws of this world are broadly worded enough to proscribe that (whether by wording any prohibition as broadly as possible out of habit or just accidentally having a certain word choice (i.e. the definitions section of a gold sale law says "gold is a mineral of the atomic number 79" and mineral had an official definition in that jurisdiction that says it's a natural resource that.. which accidentally explicitly excludes supernatural gold) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Being as how there's no such thing as supernatural gold (nor anything else), there's no need for real world laws to deal with it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
And inflation may not be the correct economic term for increasing the amount of gold in circulation (obviously only by mining/recovery or possibly nuclear physics in this universe) but doing that doesn't help the commodity's purchasing power/trading power, just like counterfeiting. Too many people counterfeiting could cause detectable inflation so couldn't it be argued that anyone who faked even 1 banknote caused some inflation? (however miniscule) "Gold inflation" i.e. isn't talked about much but the gold per human is growing very slowly since humans have mined for millennia and the low-hanging fruit is long gone. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:53, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Asteroid mining. The prices of some "guaranteed safe" commodities may fall like no one has ever imagined. The diamond cartel has been incredibly effective at keeping synthetic diamonds under control by hook and crook, mostly crook, but I don't think that real amounts of metal brought back by people who can get spaceships approved by regulators are going to fall to any similar means, especially since there's no gold cartel as organized and powerful as de Beers. Wnt (talk) 15:08, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Transmutation is possible by nuclear means. It used to be that transmutation to produce gold was something of a joke, since the only known way to do it was to start with platinum, but recently platinum has actually been cheaper than gold and so I can't rule out that someone somewhere is doing so. Which, if they can actually avoid leaving radioactive contaminants at least, should be entirely legal. Whether it is economically feasible is another question.
Precognition is also generally reckoned as legal - I have seen news stories about lottery winners who openly said that they had remembered the winning numbers, and they were not prosecuted. (Few countries actually appreciate the danger involved in such a phenomenon, and witch trials are rare outside of Africa, at least as far as anyone knows; and there they are just random mob persecutions anyway, as they've probably always been) Wnt (talk) 15:05, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Anglicizing New Testament names

Why are New Testament names Anglicized? Why is Yeshua translated as Jesus (in English and "Hay-seus" in Spanish)? Why are the names of Yeshua's Disciples Anglicized (except Judas, who was a "bad guy"). Finally, what would the correct (non-Anglicized) names of the Disciples be? (talk) 17:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

The translation of names into other languages goes back to the writing of the bible itself, and carries on through every translation into every language. English is not special in this regard. The original New Testament was written mostly in Koine Greek, and the original authors used the name Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (transliterated Iesous Christos) and not the Aramaic words Jesus and is disciples would have spoken amongst themselves. Wikipedia has an article titled Names and titles of Jesus in the New Testament if you want to get deep into the weeds on this one. The notion of preserving the original pronunciation and spelling of a name, rather than translating it, is a relatively new concept; certainly not much older than a hundred years, which is why English language texts about historical figures tend to use English names for them, while modern figures we tend to preserve their name; that's why the Dutch king is named Willem-Alexander, whereas his great-great-grandfather is known in English as William III. The reason why this was done with names in the New Testament is because this is what has always been done, by every language, in all of history, until very recently. --Jayron32 17:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Also, regarding the last question, on the original names of his disciples (by whom I presume you mean the 12 Apostles), the original Aramaic and/or Hebrew names (where known) are listed in the first line of every Wikipedia article on them, for example Simon Peter was called ܫܸܡܥܘܿܢ ܟܹ݁ܐܦ݂ܵܐ or Shemayon Keppa (Keppa is related to Cephas, which is also sometimes used in some parts of the New Testament alongside Petros) Just go to each Wikipedia article, and each will tell you the original names, both the Aramaic name and the Koine Greek name. --Jayron32 17:51, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks. I should have known the information was already here! (talk) 19:06, 24 May 2018 (UTC) (talk) 19:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

You might know this but Old Testament names weren't immune, Elijah was Elias in some Bibles. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
And apparently Eliyahu in the transliteration of the original Hebrew. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:14, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

To what extent is marriage a public commitment?

When two people get married according to all the proper laws, how easy is it for members of the public to ascertain that they are in fact promising to make a life together? In other words, can a public figure (elected or just notorious) conceal a marriage, or the identity of their spouse? Let's start with UK, US, Canada, Australia. There is a British politician whose name escapes me; she tried to conceal her new wedding ring from a reporter, who asserted that he could just FOI it. Is that true? And there's self-proclaimed "dangerous faggot" Milo Yiannopoulos, who apparently got married to a man in Hawaii[23], but won't say who. Is that legally allowed? I thought the whole point was that marriage was a public commitment. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 23:44, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Historically, even though the Church would accept a marriage as valid purely on the basis of "well at least the husband said so", they still wanted a big heads up for them and everyone else. This site (dealing with American law) says they're supposed to be public record, though some courts may ask who you are and why you need the info. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:09, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Marriages in America, as with births and deaths, are public records, but the extent to which other parties can inquire about them is a matter of the individual states' laws. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:34, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
We often hear of some celebrity "marrying in secret", presumably to avoid the media turning up in droves and spoiling the event. Well, maybe the media wasn't informed, and maybe most of the person's family and friends were not invited, but nobody ever truly marries "in secret". There are always at least 5 people involved: 2 witnesses, a celebrant, and the 2 people marrying. Then, as BB says, the records of the marriage are public. (True, if you have no information that Celebrity X has married, you'd hardly be searching public records to find out, unless you had a special reason.) -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 03:34, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Follow-up: Maybe the phrase I need to query is "public record". If marriages are a matter of public record, then how does the public (i.e. the media) find out about them? I'm not interested in how they scoop the wedding ceremony for photos, but how at any point afterwards they ascertain that A really did marry B, and thus has X for a father-in-law and can hope for their children to inherit some of Z. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 15:56, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
The rules for public records vary from place to place. In some plases, it's on a need-to-know basis. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:02, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

May 25

Colin Wilson's Spiderworld

Can someone please tell the correct order of all the parts included in this series ? On net info is incomplete or incorrect at most places. Thanks  Jon Ascton  (talk) 08:06, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

You'll be lucky! I've tried to work this out before to tidy up an online catalogue of Colin Wilson's books. Part of the problem is that The Tower seems to refer to two different works, one of which contained the other. The Second International Colin Wilson Conference is coming up in July, on that page is an email address for Colin Stanley, who probably knows more about Wilson than anyone, and who wrote The Ultimate Colin Wilson Bibliography, 1956-2015, ISBN 9780956866356, you might try asking him. Good luck! DuncanHill (talk) 09:45, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

a Courts and Repingtons - Wiltshire MPs and soldiers

Our article Charles à Court Repington says he was born at Heytesbury, the genealogy linked from the article as a source (though it surely fails WP:RS), says Chesham St, London. It also says his father was a Conservative MP, the article on his father Charles A'Court says Liberal, and the article on the constituency Wilton (UK Parliament constituency) says Whig. The genealogy site says Conservative. Can anyone find any reliable sources to help sort this out please? DuncanHill (talk) 09:24, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Not much help, but have you seen A’COURT, Charles Ashe (1785-1861), of Heytesbury, Wilts. Published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1820-1832, ed. D.R. Fisher, 2009? Alansplodge (talk) 12:15, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Bear in mind that, historically, a registration of birth told you where the registration took place, or if in a church register, where the baptism took place. It does not, necessarily, tell you where the baby was actually born. Wymspen (talk) 16:27, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Adams's Parliamentary Hand-Book calls the father a Liberal Conservative. Does that mean everybody's right? --Antiquary (talk) 17:07, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
If the terms were in lower case, I would point participants to our article on liberal conservatism. But since they seem to be party names, hard to say.
Was there a Liberal Conservative Party at some point? Or could Adams mean that the subject was part of the liberal wing of the Conservative Party? Or could it be that it was from a time when parties were not so formalized? That happened in the early US, in the First Party System, I think — we assign people retrospectively to be American Whigs or Jeffersonian Republicans or Federalists or Anti-Federalists, but these were not necessarily definite corporations with exact names. --Trovatore (talk) 17:34, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Turns out we have an article on them after all. The Liberal Conservatives are another name for the Peelites, an anti-Corn Law faction of the Conservative Party who eventually broke away to join with the Whigs and Radicals in forming the Liberal Party. --Antiquary (talk) 20:03, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Of course, Wikipedia claims that the Liberal Party wasn't formed until 1859, 5 years after that book was published. DuncanHill (talk) 20:10, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure what your point is here. Antiquary says the Liberal Conservatives eventually merged into the Liberal Party, so if Repington was so described, it seems quite natural that it would have been before the foundation of the Liberal Party. --Trovatore (talk) 21:07, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
If you've looked at the book linked you will see that it describes many of the Members as Liberal, while Wikipedia will call them Whigs or Radicals. DuncanHill (talk) 21:56, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
If I remember my history A-Level correctly, during the 1830s, the modern Liberals were formed from the Radicals and most of the Whigs, while some Whigs joined the Tories to make the Conservatives. Alansplodge (talk) 08:10, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
According to Wikipedia's page on the Liberal Party "the formal foundation of the Liberal Party is traditionally traced to 1859", but "as early as 1839, Russell had adopted the name of 'Liberals'" for the faction he belonged to. In other words there was a grouping of Liberals, so self-described, before there was an organized party on modern lines. --Antiquary (talk) 08:59, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Last Judgment

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

When will it happen?-- (talk) 20:43, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

At the top of the page, it says "We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate." Ian.thomson (talk) 20:47, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
but but ....this question has been answered here before -- (talk) 21:06, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
If you're not lying, then you already have the answer to the question and don't need to ask it again. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:14, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

May 26

Single/double consonants in English

Why is the correct spelling “sheriff” rather than “sherrif” or “sherriff?” Why is a law enforcement officer a “marshal” instead of a “marshall?” Is there now or has there ever been a difference in pronunciation? Edison (talk) 01:09, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

You're expecting consistency from English? Really now.
More seriously, you may find Sheriff#Etymology and Marshal#Etymology helpful. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 01:26, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Funnily enough, here in Australia we have a company that sells car batteries, called Marshall Batteries - - double "l". A quick look at that website will show you that they use a cartoonish image of a wild west marshal as their logo, and a slogan of "Holler for a Marshall". (Holler is a word rarely used in Australia.) It's clearly referencing the American word, but with what they saw as a more logical(?) spelling. HiLo48 (talk) 01:41, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Marshall (thusly spelt) may simply have been the name of the company's founder, as in this case. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 02:29, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Might have been, but that doesn't explain the marketing approach with the spelling "error". HiLo48 (talk) 02:33, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Correct spelling and corporate marketing are not always happy bedfellows - look at the respectable purveyor of children's shoes to our Royal Family: Start-rite. Alansplodge (talk) 07:27, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
I could understand this practice if, say, “rr” was pronounced with a rolled “r.” But double or single consonants seem to have the same pronunciation in English, at least in the US. Does any active editor know why English consonants are single or double when the pronunciations would seem to be the same? Edison (talk) 03:35, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Because it's English. Languages like Spanish and German have more consistency between pronunciation and orthography. English just doesn't roll that way. This is in part because English is a mixup of so many influences; see here for a brief discussion. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 03:57, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Double consonants in English tell the speaker to use the short vowel rather than the long vowel for the preceding vowel. Consider the minimal pairs like "razed" and "razzed" or "biter" and "bitter". --Jayron32 10:58, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Very good principle for letter combinations where that practice is followed. But here in sheriff it would imply the “e” before the r getting the long sound, like “shay-riff.” It would imply “mar-shale.” Edison (talk) 15:50, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
The word shīr used to have a long vowel ([iː], like ee), which became a diphtong in modern English shire.
Also, while English spelling is an unholy mess, German is far from being perfect, either. Mostly for historical reasons, we have silent es and hs, ei pronounced as though it was written ai, and that mess of a trigraph that is sch. Rgds  hugarheimur 16:43, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Blakiston Rectory haunting

Hi, I don't believe in ghosts but I'm quite interested in folklore and was looking at the Blakiston, South Australia page and it mentions an alleged haunting of the rectory. 'A number of past tenants of the Rectory have reported sighting a ghostly figure in the Rector's study. The alleged apparition is of an old man, sitting and quietly reading.' This has no source and a Google search didn't come up with anything. Is there any other info out there? Ringaringa13 (talk) 20:18, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

May 27

two charities working together

Did the American Red Cross and the Salvation Army work together in helping the sinking of the RMS Titanic survivors?2604:2000:7113:9D00:E4D9:AC7A:35DB:5EC2 (talk) 00:28, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA