Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities
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.
August 17
editCivil war Union unit called G. A. T.
editIn Maurine and Other Poems (1882) by Ella Wheeler Wilcox, the poem "After the Battles Are Over" (here and on the following six pages), has a note that says: Read at Re-union of the G. A. T., Madison, Wis., July 4, 1872
. Anyone have an idea what G. A. T. stands for? I can't find anything that makes sense. Based on the poem it's probably some Union military unit. The poem also mentions various battles but I'm not sure if it's really intended to list battles that unit participated in. — Alien 3
3 3 18:22, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- From this it appears that she wrote the poem for a reunion of the Grand Army of the Tennessee, whatever that was. --Antiquary (talk) 19:54, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oh, I see we have an article on the Army of the Tennessee, which I imagine is the same thing. As an Englishman my ignorance on this subject is profound. --Antiquary (talk) 19:59, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps the name "Grand" was inspired by the Grand Army of the Republic, and possibly referred to a Tennessee-specific chapter of it? (It's a fraternal organisation of Union veterans, so would make sense for a 1872 reunion.) — Alien 3
3 3 20:01, 17 August 2025 (UTC) - Actually; File:General_Grant's_tour_around_the_world;_(IA_generalgrantstou00hickiala).pdf and a few other historical accounts do mention a Grand Army of the Tennessee as a military unit, notably related to the Siege of Corinth. Given that page mentions how that siege involved three joined Union armies, including the Army of the Tennesee, I suspect that Grand Army of the Tennessee was the name for the group of the three of them.
- What corroborates this is that when that pdf mentions a Grand Army of the Tennessee on page 27, it says it had 120,000 soldiers, which according to our article for the siege was the sum of the Union forces, whereas the Army of the Tennessee proper only had 50,000 men. Case closed, I suppose? Thanks for the help! — Alien 3
3 3 20:12, 17 August 2025 (UTC)- Interesting! I would have assumed a typo for "G.A.R." Never heard of the Grand Army of the Tennessee before. Nyttend (talk) 10:51, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps the name "Grand" was inspired by the Grand Army of the Republic, and possibly referred to a Tennessee-specific chapter of it? (It's a fraternal organisation of Union veterans, so would make sense for a 1872 reunion.) — Alien 3
- Oh, I see we have an article on the Army of the Tennessee, which I imagine is the same thing. As an Englishman my ignorance on this subject is profound. --Antiquary (talk) 19:59, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
August 18
editAU local council property = Crown property?
editImagine a piece of property owned by your average local council, e.g. a reserve or public library or council offices. Is it property of the Crown in right of whatever state you're in, even though it's not directly owned by the state, and does the answer vary from state to state? (Unless there's a relevant law already in place, the state government can't just sell off or repurpose the property in the way they could a police station; they'd have to get the council's permission, or abolish the council, or put a bill through state parliament permitting the action in question.) Obviously there's no Crown-in-right-of-the-City-of-Melbourne, Crown-in-right-of-the-City-of-Sydney, etc. but one one hand it seems odd to imagine that public property would not be owned by the Crown in some sense, whilst on the other hand I suppose there's a difference between property owned directly by the state and property owned by public entities that aren't the state. This grows out of Adverse possession#Overview by country, which notes that adverse possession doesn't apply to Crown land in four states and has a much longer requirement than private land in the other two states; I'm unclear whether this is true of land owned by local governments or only of land owned directly by the state. Given the subject matter, I can't figure out how to search for the answer; my searches have left me wondering if council property is perhaps Crown-in-right-of-state property that the council manages, but I'm very unclear. Nyttend (talk) 10:50, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- I would think that the offices of, say, Melbourne City Council, are not separable property but are part of the building in which they are located. In Melbourne this is Melbourne Town Hall. I suppose this building is the property of the City of Melbourne, not of its Council. I suspect that city councils, not only in Australia but in most jurisdictions, are not juridical persons that can themselves own property. Two or more persons (natural or legal) can be co-owners of property, but I doubt such arrangements exist of property being co-owned by administrative divisions at different levels, except in special cases by special arrangements. So, if I am correct, Victoria has no property right to Melbourne Town Hall, so the building is not Crown property. ‑‑Lambiam 00:30, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry for the confusion — at least here in Victoria, people say "the council" both when referring to the shire/city/borough and when referring to the group of elected officials who administer it, and that's what I meant. My local public library is owned and operated by "the council", even though the elected councillors don't participate in day-to-day operations. Whether here or in other states, do councils/LGAs actually own property, or do they merely administer it on behalf of the Crown-in-right of the state? I see your last sentence, but it sounds like you're not certain about your supposition. Nyttend (talk) 20:51, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
August 19
editSt. Vitus being pushed into the oven
edit[1] That is apparently a medieval painting depicting an event that the article St. Vitus doesn't say anything about. Any idea who the artist is, and what was supposed to be happening? The pic has been circulating as a meme captioned "Guys, are you sure this is an MRI scan?" if of any interest. I pasted it into Tineye to find the museum page. Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:D24C:4669:D137:D5D0 (talk) 00:31, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- The relevant institute of the Salzburg University (the alma mater of Leopold Mozart) is located in Krems / Danube, some 100km west of Vienna. A link to contact this dependeance is given in your reference. Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 07:05, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- The realonline website you linked to has a tab with metadata containing most of the info you probably need: [2]. According to that, it's part of a winged altarpiece from the late 15th century, from Styria, now located in Vienna, and the painter is identified as the "Master of the Legend of Saint Veit", which presumably means it's an anonymous artists associated with this particular piece as his main attested work. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:57, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- I'd go further than "presumably". "Master of the <namepiece>", such as "Master of the Aachen Altar", "Master of the Legend of Saint Barbara", "Master of the Legend of the Magdalen", "Master of the Virgo inter Virgines", ..., is the standard way of coining a Notname for otherwise nameless makers of medieval artwork. ‑‑Lambiam 14:18, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- And here [3] is an English translation of the medieval legend of the martyrdom – in this text it's described as a "furnace" or an "oven" in which the saint was "standing". There are more frequent conventional depictions of the saint in medieval art where he is standing in a cauldron of what is supposedly hot oil, the version where it's more like a baker's oven may be particular to this one painting. (In any case, he is reported to have survived it unharmed, so maybe it was an MRI scanner after all.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:11, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- The term used in the Latin original is clibanus, which is glossed as "1. earthenware or iron vessel for cooking bread; 2. oven, furnace." Considering its etymology (see κρίβανος), the depiction of the saint-to-be being slid into a tunnel-shaped oven like an oversized meatloaf seems more plausible than having him stand up in a cauldron. However, the depiction is possibly not fully true to the Latin text, which has him jactatus [...] in medium clibani instar maris fervescentis ("thrown into the middle of the furnace like a boiling sea"). This would require implausible aiming precision of the throwers, given the limited size of the furnace's orifice as depicted. ‑‑Lambiam 15:00, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- A discussion of the piece is found here. ‑‑Lambiam 14:22, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- The painting is also on the Commons: File:Meister der Veitslegende - Martyrium des hl. Veit (Vorderseite), Christus vor Kaiphas (Rückseite) - 10886 - Belvedere.jpg. ‑‑Lambiam 15:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
,_Christus_vor_Kaiphas_(R%C3%BCckseite)_-_10886_-_Belvedere.jpg){kind=link}
Tikal–Calakmul wars
editThe article Tikal–Calakmul wars and its derivatives raise my doubt. I have not found any authoritative sources that claim that these wars took place. more precisely, I did not find the statement that there were three wars that lasted a certain time. I checked the sources in the articles, they say that these were long-term conflicts, but no distinction was made. It looks like original research Двадцать четыре (talk) 17:31, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- It may be well be WP:OR. I haven't seen a good recent source with a synthesis on this topic. The sources in the article are mostly general ones that I don't think support the details of the article. The best sources I have handy are
- Guenter, Stanley (March 2002). "UNDER A FALLING STAR:THE HIATUS AT TIKAL" (PDF). Bundoora, Victoria 3086 Australia: School of Archaeology, Faculty of Social Sciences, La Trobe University.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: ___location (link) - Boot, Eric (October 12, 2002). "THE LIFE AND TIMES OF B'ALAH CHAN K'AWIL OF MUTAL (DOS PILAS),ACCORDING TO DOS PILAS HIEROGLYPHIC STAIRWAY 2" (PDF). Rijswijk, the Netherlands: Mesoweb.
- Boot, Eric (October 13, 2002). "THE DOS PILAS-TIKAL WARS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF DOS PILAS HIEROGLYPHIC STAIRWAY 4" (PDF). Rijswijk, the Netherlands: Mesoweb. Guenter, Stanley (2003). "THE INSCRIPTIONS OF DOS PILAS ASSOCIATED WITH B'AJLAJ CHAN K'AWIIL" (PDF). Mesoweb.
- Martin, Simon; Nikolai, Grube (March 25, 2008). Chronicle of the Maya Kings and Queens (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: WW Norton. ISBN 9780500287262. Eluchil404 (talk) 00:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- As far as i understand, the only war clearly mentioned in the sources is the civil war in Tikal. But here too there is a question about the right of its existence, since everything can fit into the biography of Bʼalaj Chan Kʼawiil. Двадцать четыре (talk) 05:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- Martin, Simon. Ancient Maya politics: a political anthropology of the Classic Period 150–900 CE. Cambridge University Press, 2020. is another source to check. I don't have a hard copy and find it much more dense and theoretical when compared to the sources given above, even the technical ones from Mesoweb, but at least it's a modern synthesis not a 20-year-old virtually primary source. Chapter 9 is on Conflict and includes a case study of "War and Exile on the Stairways of Dos Pilas" which would be the conflicts in question. My understanding is that the battles in the articles are real; it's just the delineation of separate, numbered wars that is OR since the political situation is not always clear. I.e. was a cessation of fighting just an illusion based on incomplete records, a truce, an occupation, a usurpation by a rival king, in this case, scholars (or at least Stanley Guenter) have guesses but can't say for certain in light of an incomplete record. Eluchil404 (talk) 20:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- Looking more closely at the articles themselves, it is clear that they reflect the basic analysis of Simon Martin rather than Stanley Guenter. I have a strong preference for Guenter's style and a mild one for his conclusions so I went to him first, but the idea of Tikal and Calakmul as two superpowers dominating late Classic politics like the USA and Soviet Union dominated the late twentieth century is fairly traceable to Martin, IMO. But I would argue that the pages you mentioned at the beginning are not a reasonable summary of his published work and are fairly read as OR synthesis based on Martin and Grube 2000 (the cited source) and maybe some (uncited) popular science write-ups or unpublished conference presentations. I won't format most of these links to avoid cluttering up the page.
- Site Q: The Case for a Classic Maya Super-Polity
- Evidence for Macro-Political Organization Amongst Classic Maya Lowland States
- MARTIN, S., and N. GRUBE. "Maya superstates." Archaeology 48, no. 6 (1995): 41-46.
- Tikal's "Star War" Against Naranjo
- Unmasking "Double Bird", Ruler of Tikal
- Caracol Altar 21 Revisited: More Data on Double Bird and Tikal's Wars of the Mid-Sixth Century
- Martin, Simon. Ancient Maya politics: a political anthropology of the Classic Period 150–900 CE. Cambridge University Press, 2020.
- Eluchil404 (talk) 00:26, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
- No one denies these conflicts, but such a specific selection in the articles is very similar to the original research. Even if there is something in this source, it is not enough. These wars can be moved to articles on the history of cities, biographies and others. Separate articles are superfluous Двадцать четыре (talk) 09:36, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
- As far as i understand, the only war clearly mentioned in the sources is the civil war in Tikal. But here too there is a question about the right of its existence, since everything can fit into the biography of Bʼalaj Chan Kʼawiil. Двадцать четыре (talk) 05:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
Subsidiary question
editWhat kind of sources exist for pre-Columbian Mayan politics? Obviously we have some written records that are secondary sources, but what about primary written records? Would archaeological artefacts (without inscriptions) be able to yield much information on the question? Nyttend (talk) 02:46, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
- Of the presumably many thousands of pre-Columbian Mayan manuscripts, only four have survived the destruction campaign waged by Diego de Landa. None cover political events or themes. ‑‑Lambiam 12:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
- There are also surviving monumental inscriptions, though we don't seem to have an overview-style article on them. Mentioned here and we have some decent articles on the individual sites, such as Yaxchilan. The quantity, quality, and nature of such inscriptions is sufficient that our article at Palenque has a list of rulers stretching back hundreds of years. Matt Deres (talk) 14:11, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
- Modern sources, like those I linked above are based on are based an ancient inscriptions, mostly on stone stelae, but one article is based on a wooden lintel and there exists a few inscriptions in stucco or on pottery. Inferring political facts from material culture is notoriously difficult. For instance, in the Early Classic Period many Maya cites show Teotihuacano style architecture or pottery in at least some areas, is this because they were conquered by Teotihuacan, allied with it, or simply copying a popular trend? The first interpretation is currently favored (while at one time it was mostly rejected as improbable) based on inscriptional evidence. The Arrival of Strangers Eluchil404 (talk) 20:36, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
- The inscriptional evidence is pretty extensive, because the Classic-period Maya erected stelae to commemorate an awful lot of events in their reigns, especially calendrical ceremonies and victories in battle. In some cases, kings' lives can be followed down to their dates of birth. But the record for most of the city-states has major gaps in some periods, and a lot of phenomena beyond the dry event-and-date stuff, like the nature of the relationship between the Maya city-states and Teotihuacan as Eluchil mentions, are not directly discussed in the record and thus very open to interpretation. A. Parrot (talk) 16:56, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
August 20
editCrow people and scalping
editI just finished Jeremiah Johnson on DVD. The Crow people are depicted as scalping the Europeans and killing Johnson's (Robert Redford's) Flathead wife and mute son Caleb. Can anyone with familiarity with the film attest to its historical accuracy? I looked in the Crow article and searched for "scalp" but could only find the Crows being victims of scalping at the hands of the Piegan Blackfeet (and scalping isn't mentioned in their article either despite the photo). Any help? Also were the Flatheads really Christianized? Therapyisgood (talk) 04:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- Here two Dakota pictographs (the bottom left two in the plate on the preceding page) are interpreted as "Crows scalped an Oglála boy alive" and "Some Crows came to their camp and scalped a boy". I cannot vouch for the veracity of the account or the accuracy of its interpretation, but it establishes that the Crow people have at least a historical reputation of engaging in scalping. ‑‑Lambiam 13:06, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- Here are more historical references: [4], [5], [6]. ‑‑Lambiam 12:25, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
August 22
editobituary
editwhy did you not have an obit for Bill Moyers? having donated to you for a while this truly has me upset as you will post obits for lesser known or less important people 50.35.131.62 (talk) 20:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- Are you talking about the recent deaths section on the main page? If so, the simple answer is because nobody nominated the article at in the news. I think it might be a little late for Bill Moyers now, but in the future, feel free to nominate an article if you think it should be on there. MediaKyle (talk) 21:31, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- It looks like it was nominated, but the article had unresolved quality concerns at the time: Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/June 2025#RD: Bill Moyers. Aaron Liu (talk) 22:30, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- Are you mistaking us for another organization? We here are the reference desk of an encyclopedia and never post obituaries. The "In the News" section of the Main Page of Wikipedia may note the death of a celebrity, like right now that of astronaut Jim Lovell, but this is typically a brief sentence, not an obituary. ‑‑Lambiam 21:32, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- The 'In the News' section is not meant to function as a news report, i.e. to be people's first alert to events: it is intended to point to particularly good articles that are about subjects which are receiving current news reports elsewhere for some reason; sometimes that may be because the subject is a person who has just died.
- The size of the section is limited and there are always more candidate articles (about recently deceased people and many other types of subjects) than can be accommodated; there is a formal procedure (which MediaKyle linked above) for nominating and considering candidates. If (as in this case) a person's article is not as good as it might be, it will not make the cut – this is a reflection on the quality of the article at that time, not of the worthiness of the person the article is about. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 07:42, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
- I find your mention of past donations to be somewhat problematic. Your having given Wikipedia or the Wikimedia foundation money does not mean that you get control over what we do or do not publish. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 23:07, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- From time to time, a user will make this type of complaint, and of course there's no way to verify it. Take it as a bluff. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:51, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- That's good to know. I was so scared they might be serious. Now I can sleep again. ‑‑Lambiam 02:41, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- From time to time, a user will make this type of complaint, and of course there's no way to verify it. Take it as a bluff. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:51, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
August 23
editsecurities regulations
editI’m curious about instances where investment securities regulations though well established on paper, prove inefficient in practice, sometimes even working against their intended purpose. Grotesquetruth (talk) 16:53, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
- Maybe start with this Regulatory capture article. Abductive (reasoning) 13:17, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
August 24
editSchool year
editIs there any other country where school year starts typically already in first half of August? In Finland, it started on 7 August. This was its earliest possible date. In 2026, it will be on 13 August. Had the school year already started by 7 August this year in any other country? The school year will end on 30 May in 2026 and 5 June in 2027. In which countries does the school year start already in August? When does it usually start in US and Canada? --40bus (talk) 21:18, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- Ah you're back again. Have you tried google? It's a search engine available at google.com. You might find it useful. Nanonic (talk) 21:31, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- Aren't slightly harder questions like this one what the ReferenceDesk is for? Aaron Liu (talk) 02:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- Feel free to humour them, they'll be back again shortly with more. Nanonic (talk) 10:33, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- Why go to Google when we have Wikipedia? Academic year 2A00:23C7:2B14:A201:C078:6524:CE5C:D86 (talk) 18:16, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- Aren't slightly harder questions like this one what the ReferenceDesk is for? Aaron Liu (talk) 02:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- there is no simple answer for the US. Public education is a state resposibility, but it is handled at the county (or even city) level. In my county (population approx. 160,000) there are 3 school systems. One has already started and 2 start tomorrow. And surrounding counties are different. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:37, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- Answer from the Netherlands: The country is divided into 3 regions, north, middle and south, with school holidays staggered. This is to spread the load on the tourist industry. Most (by far) tourists in the Netherlands (except within a 20 km radius around Amsterdam) are domestic. It also helps a bit to spread the load on long distance transport. I think this division into 3 regions is common in Europe, although the regions may be more random and discontinuous.
- One region ends the school year on the first Friday after 2 July, the other regions one and two weeks later. The next school year begins on the Monday 45 days later, so the earliest possible start date is 17 August, the last 6 September. Each year, either the early and middle or the middle and late regions swap, stretching or shrinking the school year by one week. This can be compensated for using the other holidays. There're some voices to shorten the summer holiday to 5 or 4 weeks, but there're economic reasons against it.
- These are only guidelines from the national government; schools may deviate. Deviations are uncommon, except for some regulars. For example, in most of the south and some of the middle, the spring holiday is shifted to coincide with Carnival. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:30, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- A few jurisdictions here in Canada have adopted a continuous school year [7], without a long summer break (it's reduced to one month instead of the usual two to two-and-a-half months), but with more and longer breaks during the school year to compensate. This results in the start of the new school year falling in early August. There's an article on the practice in the US, at Year-round school in the United States. Xuxl (talk) 14:47, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- I don't have particularly good sources, but I googled, and schools in Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Greenland, and Faroe Islands start in the the first half of August. Also selective schools in the US and Hong Kong. As for the second question, schools in the US mostly start in August and September and for Canada, most provinces' schools start in September. Please remember that I just Googled all of this, so these are just the rough estimates. 24.190.200.120 (talk) 01:06, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
- Australia and New Zealand start their school years in late January (after Christmas break)… but then that is the end of summer there. I would assume most countries in the Southern hemisphere have a similar calendar. Blueboar (talk) 01:43, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
- Anecdotally...in the state I live in, the school year USED to always start the day after Labor Day (therefore, the Tuesday after the first Monday in September). Over the years/decades, that date has been continually pushed forward little by little, so that now many schools start in the first or second week of August. (And also likewise ends earlier as well - mid/late May instead of mid/late June). 76.20.114.184 (talk) 19:41, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
World War I dogfight before 5 October 1914
editcurrently at DYK we have Aerial combat of 5 October 1914, where the proposed hook would be "... that the first "dogfight" of World War I took place on 5 October 1914 in France?" does anyone know of a WWI dogfight prior to this? thank you. Therapyisgood (talk) 21:32, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- Our article Miodrag Tomić describes an earlier hostile aerial encounter as follows: "On 15 August, Tomić encountered an enemy plane while conducting a reconnaissance flight over Austria-Hungary. The Austro-Hungarian aviator initially waved at Tomić, who waved back. The enemy pilot then took a revolver and began shooting at Tomić's plane. Tomić produced a pistol of his own and fired back." But this does not fit the notion of a dogfight. ‑‑Lambiam 00:21, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- "A dogfight, or dog fight, is an aerial battle between fighter aircraft that is conducted at close range." (from our own article) How does that definition not apply to the circumstance you described? Seems like a perfect fit to me. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 11:44, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- In a dogfight, the airplanes are fitted with weapons designed for that purpose (taking out an enemy plane in flight); it's not the pilots pulling out a personal piece. Xuxl (talk) 14:50, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- Says who? --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:11, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- Wiktionary defines the metaphorical sense of dogfight as: "A twisting turning battle between two or more military aircraft, especially between fighters." Like angry dogs, they keep coming at each other. The 15 August 1914 encounter between a Serbian and an Austro-Hungarian military plane, as related, involved no twisting or turning; it was a relatively straight-forward business. ‑‑Lambiam 02:29, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- In a dogfight, the airplanes are fitted with weapons designed for that purpose (taking out an enemy plane in flight); it's not the pilots pulling out a personal piece. Xuxl (talk) 14:50, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- "A dogfight, or dog fight, is an aerial battle between fighter aircraft that is conducted at close range." (from our own article) How does that definition not apply to the circumstance you described? Seems like a perfect fit to me. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 11:44, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
Guy between Mannerheim and Ryti
edit
The Führer of Germany Adolf Hitler paid a surprise visit to Finland to visit the Commander-in-chief of the Finnish Defence Forces Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim on Mannerheim's 75th birthday. Shown here is a photograph of them with Wilhelm Keitel on the extreme left, Hitler and Mannerheim in the centre, and Ryti on the right. Does anyone know who is the guy immediately to the right of Mannerheim, with Mannerheim's nose pointing to his cap? JIP | Talk 23:11, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- It looks like the Finnish Pilot Qualification Badge (lentomerkki) on his left breast (swastika surrounded by stylised wings, surmounted by a crown). DuncanHill (talk) 00:13, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- This insignia is the second image in the gallery in the section Western use of the swastika in the early 20th century § Finland. ‑‑Lambiam 00:26, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- Could it be Yrjö Könni? At the time the photo was taken Könni's rank would have been major. He looks older than on the undated photo here, where he has fewer decorations and no brass on his collar but is also wearing the lentomerkki on his left breast. ‑‑Lambiam 00:45, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- I think it is Einar Mäkinen--Fornax (talk) 09:25, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- Was he ever a pilot or in the air force? The chap in the question photo has air force shoulder boards (wings above lion). DuncanHill (talk) 15:25, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- More specifically, I find no indication that Mäkinen was awarded the lentomerkki, something that would have been notable enough to record in his Finnish Wikipedia article. The person in the 1942 photo above has striking eyes, set back in a gaunt physiognomy below dark eyebrows, which I see reflected in the photos of young Könni. I see nothing similar in photos of Mäkinen, such as here or, more en face, here. On neither photo is he wearing the lentomerkki. ‑‑Lambiam 12:50, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- Was he ever a pilot or in the air force? The chap in the question photo has air force shoulder boards (wings above lion). DuncanHill (talk) 15:25, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- I think it is Einar Mäkinen--Fornax (talk) 09:25, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
August 25
editI really want to fill out the above article, whose subject is a huge part of the reason texts from antiquity like the Bible, Zhuangzi, Gilgamesh, Upanishads are so fascinating and otherworldly. On the other hand, it dawns on me that literary redaction is just about the closest mode of operation the ancient world had to Wikipedia editing 
.
Problem is, I'm certain because I hear scholars talk about how much they've learned about how ancient scribes and scribal institutions worked with and redacted texts, but I can't find any of it, at least in the general sense I expect from typing "redaction" into Google Scholar. Does anyone know where such a treatment of literary redactors and redaction is, or anything remotely like that? Remsense 🌈 论 12:16, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
Need for synchronisation gear
editTrain of thought from the dogfighting discussion above...As far as I can remember reading, all First World War aircraft with rigid-mounted guns (i.e. you aim them by pointing the plane) had the guns in front of the pilot, thus necessitating the invention of a synchronisation gear to avoid shooting off the propellors. Did nobody attempt to mount guns on the wings (i.e. beyond the reach of the propellors), and if so, why not? Were the wood-and-fabric wings typical of the period simply too flimsy to permit this, or was there some other reason, or did this get attempted and I'm just unaware of it? Nyttend (talk) 19:45, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- Early machine guns were crap and jammed a lot, some pilots were issued with a mallet to give the breech a whack to try to fix this. As well as that, the good guns ony had so much ammo until they needed to be reloaded - lewis guns only had 90 or so rounds in each drum. And yes the weight of the guns and the ammo was a bit much for the frames at the time. Some considered slinging a gun under the fuselage instead, keeping the centre of gravity/balance and therefore potentially avoiding the need for a sync gear (if low slung enough) but that wouldn't have negated the jamming/reloading issues. Nanonic (talk) 20:00, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- Wing-mounted guns also need to be harmonised, and that was a fertile area for disagreement. That article also mentions problems with flexing of the wings, which would of course have been greater on the earlier, wood and string, airframes. DuncanHill (talk) 23:14, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- Wow, I've never heard of harmonisation. I just assumed that wing-mounted guns would always fire straight ahead, so you had a better chance of hitting something, even if your fuselage were slightly misaimed. Nyttend (talk) 01:35, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- If weight is the worst problem of the guns, it's best to mount them on the wings. After all, the aeroplane is carried by its wings. That's why most airliners have their engines there. If the main problem is recoil, mount the guns on the engine, as that has the most mass. If flexing of the aeroplane is the worst problem, the engine is again the best place to put the guns. The spinning propeller (in some cases even the spinning engine block) acts as a gyroscope. A low centre of mass is nice for ground handling, but doesn't really matter in air. Putting the heavy guns on the wings increases the aeroplane's moment of inertia, reducing manoeuvrability.
- There are different solutions to the problem, like twin engines or pusher propellers. Or shoot through a hollow propeller shaft. You need a geared engine, as you can't shoot through a hollow crank shaft. I suppose people tried most of these solutions. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:50, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- Wing-mounted guns also need to be harmonised, and that was a fertile area for disagreement. That article also mentions problems with flexing of the wings, which would of course have been greater on the earlier, wood and string, airframes. DuncanHill (talk) 23:14, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Nyttend Re: "to mount guns on the wings" -> Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.5 -> Foster mounting — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.221.58.22 (talk) 06:02, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- Wing guns slow the aircraft roll rate because mass is farther from the centerline. To improve roll rate, Soviet pilots often removed the two wing guns from their P-39 Airacobras, retaining the two fuselage guns and the central cannon. This also lightened the aircraft for better range. Binksternet (talk) 15:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- Nyttend (apologies for coming late to the party); as far as British design was concerned, there was an RAF requirement for guns to be within the reach of the pilot, so that any stoppages could be cleared (as mentioned above). This dictum was only abandoned in 1930 with an Air Ministry Specification for a four-gun fighter, resulting in the Gloster Gladiator biplane which finally entered service in 1937 and had two Vickers machine guns in the fuselage and two Lewis guns in the wings. Alansplodge (talk) 11:39, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- Wing guns slow the aircraft roll rate because mass is farther from the centerline. To improve roll rate, Soviet pilots often removed the two wing guns from their P-39 Airacobras, retaining the two fuselage guns and the central cannon. This also lightened the aircraft for better range. Binksternet (talk) 15:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
Commission of investigation into Blanton Winship/Ponce Massacre
editSome time after the massacre there was an investigation headed by Arthur Garfield Hays, as I understand it a founder, chair and counsel of the ACLU. After a little research it seems that this was set up by Puerto Rico civil society (at least one source said it was under the aegis of the US govt) and Hays and the ACLU were invited to join/assist/head the Commission of Inquiry into the Causes of the Ponce Massacre. I'm primarily looking for the text of the report, but would also be interested in other documents - Winship's press releases and Pérez-Marchand's (the DA) reports to Winship. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 23:03, 25 August 2025 (UTC).
- Our article Ponce massacre wrongly said the report was by the United States Commission on Civil Rights and led by Hays, but as he died three years before the Commission came in to being that was obviously impossible. Anyway, Here is the "Report of the Commission of Inquiry on Civil Rights in Puerto Rico, May 22, 1937", you will need Berkeley Library access, I suggest asking at WP:RX, and here is a BA thesis which will be of interest and contain pointers for further research. DuncanHill (talk) 23:44, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
August 26
editHouse Committee on Assassinations hearings films
editSuch as these, from 1978. They appear to be timestamped "WPA", but I don't know who they are. I guess the question is, is the filming by a private media corp or a government employee? Thanks! —Fortuna, imperatrix 15:02, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- The website you linked is wpafilmlibrary.com. The homepage says
Formerly WPA Film Library
. Aaron Liu (talk) 00:03, 27 August 2025 (UTC)- Thanks. Which still doesn't clarify who made the film in the first place... —Fortuna, imperatrix 10:07, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- That would have just a few months before C-SPAN started, which means it would have been the "media pool". --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 15:02, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, Jpgordon, so basically: not a "US government official as part of his duties", which would otherwise make it out of copyright, but it's not? —Fortuna, imperatrix 17:22, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
So it depends on whether WETA-TV counts. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:53, 27 August 2025 (UTC)Archives of WETA-TV
- This collection features extensive coverage of American politics, particularly in the 1980s and early 2000s, from the Washington-area PBS affiliate.
- Thousands of hours of Congressional Hearings: Watergate, Whitewater, Iran-Contra, JFK Assassination, Church Committee, Supreme Court Justice nominations, and more.
— About MPI Stock Footage Archive
- Thanks, Jpgordon, so basically: not a "US government official as part of his duties", which would otherwise make it out of copyright, but it's not? —Fortuna, imperatrix 17:22, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- That would have just a few months before C-SPAN started, which means it would have been the "media pool". --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 15:02, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. Which still doesn't clarify who made the film in the first place... —Fortuna, imperatrix 10:07, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
Keble or Newman?
editIn Chapter IV of The Lost Stradivarius (1895), Gaskell mentions "some beautiful verses by Mr Keble":
Cease, stranger, cease those witching notes,
The art of syren choirs;
Hush the seductive voice that floats
Across the trembling wires.
Music's ethereal power was given
Not to dissolve our clay,
But draw Promethean beams from heaven
To purge the dross away
I can't find the original of these, but I have seen them attributed online (vaguely, no title, date, or volume mentioned) to John Henry Newman, not John Keble. So, were they Keble or were they Newman, or were they someone else entirely, and what is their title and where and when did they first appear? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 19:59, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- Siren Isles published here in 1836. I can't make out the writer's signature's name, but it is rather too long to be Keble
and differs from Newman's. Modocc (talk) 22:03, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, thank you. The volume is Lyra Apostolica, which Oxford Reference tells me is "A collection of 179 sacred poems, published 1836, contributed originally to the British Magazine. The poems appeared anonymously; the six authors, all associated with the Oxford Movement, were each designated by a Greek letter: J. W. Bowden (α), R. H. Froude (β), Keble (γ), Newman (δ), R. I. Wilberforce (ε), and I. Williams (ζ)". And the poem has a δ, so Newman it is. DuncanHill (talk) 22:25, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- Yep, I found them on WorldCat too. Modocc (talk) 22:32, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, thank you. The volume is Lyra Apostolica, which Oxford Reference tells me is "A collection of 179 sacred poems, published 1836, contributed originally to the British Magazine. The poems appeared anonymously; the six authors, all associated with the Oxford Movement, were each designated by a Greek letter: J. W. Bowden (α), R. H. Froude (β), Keble (γ), Newman (δ), R. I. Wilberforce (ε), and I. Williams (ζ)". And the poem has a δ, so Newman it is. DuncanHill (talk) 22:25, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
August 27
editEckland
editI was watching a video on Youtube called "Die Deutschen im Eckland – Die deutsche Geschichte Pokutiens!". My German is not that great but apparently, according to the content of this video, "Eckland" should be an alternate historical German name for the region called Pokuttia. I wasn't able to find any proof of it anywhere. Do you have any idea? 80.180.16.18 (talk) 07:07, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- Ecke is German for "corner" or "nook", so it may be a whimsical reference to the place's ___location (geographical or metaphorical), an unofficial nickname, or just a translation by the video makers of the Slavic Pokuttia (which the article translates as as "round the corner") rather than any actual historically used name. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 07:47, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- It is a joke, not a real name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.221.59.26 (talk) 10:03, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- But sometimes these sorts of things are real names, not jokes. See Name of Ukraine. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 21:07, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- It seems that the author of the video considers it a real German exonym, not just an unofficial translation to convey its meaning. In the description of the video he wrote: "In der Landschaft, die im deutschen auch Eckland genannt wird, lebten sowohl in Städten wie Stanislau, als auch auf dem Land deutsche Siedler" ("In the region, which is also called Eckland in German, German settlers lived both in cities like Stanislau and in the countryside"). It could potentially be like the situation of Bucovina which has a straightforward German version (Bukowina) and an alternate historical German adaptation (Buchenland). Another example is Transylvania, with both Transsilvanien and Siebenbürgen. --80.180.16.18 (talk) 08:09, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
The paths of ill
editIn Chapter X of J. Meade Falkner's The Lost Stradivarius (1895), Sophia Maltravers recalls "a little piece of poetry which I learnt as a girl":
How easy are the paths of ill;
How steep and hard the upward ways;
A child can roll the stone downhill
That breaks a giant's hand to raise.
As before, can we identify the original? Google returns only The Lost Stradivarius. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 23:42, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- Falkner wrote "down hill" as two words. It is possible that Falkner created this little rhyme himself, choosing to present it as a longtime poem for the sake of the narrative. The lack of other search results makes this plausible. ‑‑Lambiam 12:17, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- That seems probable. The phrase "upward way" appears in a few Victorian tracts and in this hymn. Alansplodge (talk) 13:01, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
August 28
editMisnamed political entities
editIt's known that the Nazis definitely weren't socialists, and that North Korea is not democratic at all. Can you think of more examples? Matt714931 (talk) 03:23, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- Australia's Liberal Party is the far more right wing of Australia's two major parties. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HiLo48 (talk • contribs) 03:31, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- Being European, this doesn't seem like a case of misnaming at all. Is Australia following the American concept of "liberal" or the continental? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.221.58.22 (talk) 07:53, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- It's misnaming because "every boy and every gal that’s born into the world alive, Is either a little Liberal or else a little Conservative!", and the Australian Liberal Party is a Conservative party. DuncanHill (talk) 19:43, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- Liberal-v-conservative has never made much sense as a dichotomy. Liberalism is a theory of how things should be; conservatism is a theory of how fast things should change. You can be both liberal and conservative (in a country that is already liberal, for example, or if you think liberalism is the correct goal, but needs to be approached gradually), you can be one or the other, or you can be neither.
- I am not super-up-to-date on the current state of Australian politics, but I do think the Liberal Party is almost certainly the more classically liberal of the two major parties, and therefore is not misnamed. --Trovatore (talk) 21:20, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- Liberalism, in the British sense, is primarily an opposition to concentrations of power. Suggest you read Liberalism by Jonathan Parry. "Classical liberalism" has never been a particular feature of British Liberalism, despite the claims of many British Conservatives. DuncanHill (talk) 21:28, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps. I am not a historian of the UK. Be that as it may, the Australian Liberal Party does oppose at least one sort of concentration of power, namely economic power in the organs of the State. (Or at least that's my impression of it; as I say, I'm also not that sure of myself as regards the positions of Australian parties.) --Trovatore (talk) 21:34, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- Liberalism, in the British sense, is primarily an opposition to concentrations of power. Suggest you read Liberalism by Jonathan Parry. "Classical liberalism" has never been a particular feature of British Liberalism, despite the claims of many British Conservatives. DuncanHill (talk) 21:28, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- It's misnaming because "every boy and every gal that’s born into the world alive, Is either a little Liberal or else a little Conservative!", and the Australian Liberal Party is a Conservative party. DuncanHill (talk) 19:43, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- The pre-war National Socialists certainly had some socialist policies, such as goverment direction of labour, free or subsidised holidays and sports facilities for workers and government control of food prices. Alansplodge (talk) 11:12, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- But, when the National Socialist German Workers' Party was founded, the term socialism was generally understood to mean advocacy of the ownership and control of the means of production by society as a whole. The Nazis embraced the private ownership of capital and (as a forerunner of neoliberalism?) even transferred public ownership into the private sector. ‑‑Lambiam 11:59, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- That's true, but more driven by pragmatism than dogma. They despised capitalism but saw businesses as a useful tool in building the Volksgemeinschaft or "people's community" that was central to their ideology. It's a much debated point.
- An interesting article on the subject is Were the Nazis really Socialists? It depends on how you define socialism. Alansplodge (talk) 12:56, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- You might also be interested in an article in the current issue of The Atlantic, titled Trump's Right-wing Socialism. --Trovatore (talk) 21:10, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- But, when the National Socialist German Workers' Party was founded, the term socialism was generally understood to mean advocacy of the ownership and control of the means of production by society as a whole. The Nazis embraced the private ownership of capital and (as a forerunner of neoliberalism?) even transferred public ownership into the private sector. ‑‑Lambiam 11:59, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- Being European, this doesn't seem like a case of misnaming at all. Is Australia following the American concept of "liberal" or the continental? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.221.58.22 (talk) 07:53, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- If you hear that a party is named the People's Party for Freedom and Democracy, you'd never guess the policies they actually pursue:
powerwealth to the people, provided that these people are already rich. Even worse is the Party for Freedom, which stands for the freedom to take away the rights of "the other". And then there is the decidedly antidemocratic Forum for Democracy. - Turkey has a party that styles itself as the AK Parti, which literally means the "HONEST Party". Their favourite pastime is throwing people who are alleged to have supported protests to their policies for lifetime in jail; see e.g. Osman Kavala. Another party is the İYİ Parti, the "GOOD Party", which implies a dramatic redefinition of the term good. ‑‑Lambiam 11:48, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- You've got me worried. Is it possible then that Your Party doesn't belong to me? --Antiquary (talk) 16:59, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- It is important to remember that the Nazi party existed before the rise of Hitler… and that originally it was anti-big business and anti-capitalist… closer to what we would today call “socialism”. The NAZI party of the 1920s had different goals and policies than it did just ten years later in the 1930s when Hitler came to power.
- It is also important to remember that political terms change their meaning over time. Teddy Roosevelt was called a “progressive” in his day, but his policies were not at all those of modern “progressives”. The “right wing” in the French Revolution isn’t the same as the modern “right wing”. We should not apply the modern definition of “socialism” to the politics that existed in Europe over 100 years ago. Blueboar (talk) 14:01, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- That Party for Freedom isn't really a party either. It's a one-man-show with some puppets on strings. PiusImpavidus (talk) 18:45, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- Rome was never a part of the Holy Roman Empire. --Golbez (talk) 19:10, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- As Voltaire quipped, Ce corps qui s'appelait et qui s'appelle encore le saint empire romain n'était en aucune manière ni saint, ni romain, ni empire. ("This body, which called itself and which still calls itself the Holy Roman Empire, was in no way holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.") ‑‑Lambiam 00:25, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- The traditional British reply to that one is that the Lord Privy Seal, who I suppose is a sort of political entity, is neither a lord, nor a privy, nor a seal. --Antiquary (talk) 08:30, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- Though amusing, I think the quip is given too much weight. It was by most standards an Empire as it encompassed diverse different ethnicities and territories of varying autonomy, some of which are now separate countries; it was Holy insamuch as it was decreed by the main religious leader of the area; and it was Roman in the sense that most of it was in formerly Roman territory, contained many Roman monuments and buildings (some then still in use) and all educated (and many uneducated) persons in it were conscious of this heritage. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 08:34, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- As Voltaire quipped, Ce corps qui s'appelait et qui s'appelle encore le saint empire romain n'était en aucune manière ni saint, ni romain, ni empire. ("This body, which called itself and which still calls itself the Holy Roman Empire, was in no way holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.") ‑‑Lambiam 00:25, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- The Official Monster Raving Loony Party does not consist of monsters or raving loonies. (They leave that constituency to the Republican Party (United States)). Clarityfiend (talk) 12:21, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- Queen Victoria was only ever Empress of India; where did we British get the idea we had a British Empire? -- Verbarson talkedits 19:54, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- You don't need an emperor to be an empire. Edmund Burke, 1775, "An Empire is the aggregate of many States, under one common head". DuncanHill (talk) 21:31, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
August 29
editWorld models
editRegarding the theory that Lenin was a mushroom, Scott Alexander writes:[8]
- First, much like LLMs, lots of people don’t really have world models. They believe what their friends believe, or what has good epistemic vibes. If they don’t currently think that Lenin was a mushroom, it’s not because they understand human agency / scientific materialism / psychedelia and have a well-worked out theory of why fungi can’t contain sentient mushroom spirits that possess leading communist politicians. They don’t believe it because it feels absurd. They predict that other people would laugh at them if they said it. If they get told that it it’s not absurd, or that maybe people would laugh at them if they didn’t say it, then their opinion will at least teeter precariously.
Is the idea that some people have world models and others don't a known precept in psychology? Does it have a name, a theoretical literature, or anything like that? Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:9AFF:EDB:3F8A:9CF3 (talk) 19:06, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- See Schema (psychology). Modocc (talk) 20:37, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, that looks helpful and I'll read it. It's not exactly what I'm seeking though, so I may be back later with a follow-up. 2601:644:8581:75B0:B3DD:2024:6968:B621 (talk) 22:08, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- I'd say that everyone who can somehow navigate this world (not only in the literal sense) has some world model. No one's world model is perfect, and for most it will be severely lacking in aspects that are unimportant for their daily functioning. If some clips I see on YouTube are an indication, the ___location of Belgium on a map is not part of the world model of many Americans. They can still be successful hair stylists or musicians. Few people will know what dihydrogen monoxide (DHMO, aka hydroxyl acid) is, but does that matter? Part of most people's world model is to trust real experts on some topic more than their own ignorant guesses. Is that wrond? Why shouldn't they believe an apparent expert who tells them DHMO has been found in cancer tumors and asks them to sign a petition to ban its use? After all, we expect them to trust experts who say that certain mRNA vaccines have proven safe. I do; my world model suggests me no way of verifying such claims independently. ‑‑Lambiam 22:42, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- BTW, while I have my doubts about a mushroom displaying the level of sentience observed in Vladimir Ilyich, the theory that Stephen Miller is a reptilian humanoid that arrived from another dimension goes a long way to explain some things. ‑‑Lambiam 22:49, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- With Lenin's corpse having been on display for over a century, it's possible he could be sprouting mushrooms by now. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:57, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
August 30
editWho was the first actress?
editHello! Who was the first professional actress to perform onstage in Germany? I assume it was around the mid 17th century, when women started to perform on the stage in neighboring Netherlands? There appear to have been actresses working in Germany (then called The Holy Roman Empire) around the 1690s, but I do not know who was the first. Can anyone help? Thank you.--Aciram (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- Already asked at the Entertainment desk. Do not post twice. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:58, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
August 31
editBoothby, the Krays, and the Sunday Mirror
editAccording to our Kray twins and Robert Boothby, the Sunday Mirror was forced to sack its editor after the "The Pictures We Must Not Print" story in 1964. However, according to our articles Sunday Mirror and Michael Christiansen, Christiansen was editor of the Sunday Mirror from 1963 to 1972. So, which, if either, is right? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 00:14, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
- Scandals in Past and Contemporary Politics, Garrard & Newell (2006) p. 73 say "THe paper's editor was sacked..." without naming him. Alansplodge (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
- The same wording is used in Great Parliamentary Scandals: Five Centuries of Calumny, Smear and Innuendo, Parris & Macguire (2004) p. 121.
- Alansplodge (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
- Bingo! Walking on the Water, Hugh Cudlipp (1976) p. 407 says:
- The editors of the Sunday Pictorial, later the Sunday Mirror, were Colin Valadar (1953-1959), Lee Howard (1959-1961), Reg Payne (1961-1964), Michael Christiansen (1964- 1972)...
- With this clue, I found Press Gang: How Newspapers Make Profits from Propaganda, Greenslade (2004) pp. 160-161, which gives a much fuller account of Payne's demise.
- Alansplodge (talk) 15:20, 31 August 2025 (UTC)