Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/H

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

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.

February 4

Rashidun

Can I get the Brill Encyclopedia of Islam article on the Rashidun caliphate? I am adding to the wikipedia article on this subject and I think the EofI would be most useful Louis P. Boog (talk) 02:59, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In general, a good place for such requests is WP:RX. I suppose this is the article named al-K̲h̲ulafāʾ al-Rās̲h̲idūn, which should be accessible to editors with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or academic institutional credentials. ‑‑Lambiam 06:31, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Names of 12,000 martyrs

12000 modern martyrs (or Witnesses to Christianity) were commemorated in May 2000 during the Great Jubilee. Could anyone find a list of the names? Renata•3 05:22, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, the list was never finalized and published. There is now a renewed effort under the care of a newly created "Commission of the New Martyrs - Witnesses of the Faith".^[1] A recent addition to the list is Dorothy Stang.^[2] ‑‑Lambiam 07:24, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. I saw an article that 27 Lithuanians were on the list so I was expecting to find a full list somewhere. Thank you for looking into this. Renata•3 15:03, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tanks from the Kharkiv Armored Plant

Where can I find data on the fate of 585 tanks from the Kharkiv Armored Plant, which were listed there at the beginning of the Ukrainian events? And what is the fate of the minesweeper Balta, the sailing ship Druzhba and Project 1204 boats in Ukraine? And what are the estimates of Ukraine's mobilization resource now? Vyacheslav84 (talk) 10:06, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nice try, but I suspect Ukraine doesn't want Russians to know that. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:52, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Future deportations to Colombia - what aircraft will be used?

Colombia refused to accept deported refugees transported in US military machines. Finally, they took their refugees back in their own machines. Trump administration triumphed that Colombia had given in. But the basic question remained unclear: Will Colombia accept US military planes with refugees in future or not? --KnightMove (talk) 15:40, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe. Maybe not. It is in the future and based on far too many factors to make an educated guess. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 20:35, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there must have been some kind of agreement between the two countries. The USA boasted that Colombia had totally given in, implying (but not explicitly claiming) that Colombia will accept military aircraft with deportees in future. Colombia did not contradict, but maybe actually the US government folded and will only use civilian planes in future - on the condition that Colombians keep their mouth shut and let the US present themselves as the winner. It seems possible that details of the actual agreement have been leaked anywhere. --KnightMove (talk) 07:11, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the use of military aircraft, Colombia objected to the deportees being treated inhumanely, including being escorted by military personnel, being handcuffed on board and paraded before journalists. It seemed that they obtained concessions on these points although negotiations are still ongoing. Xuxl (talk) 10:44, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 5

Four-year itch

Why is there a six-year itch, but no four-year itch? Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 15:46, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we're capable of answering why an idiom hasn't formed. Why do you think it should have? --Golbez (talk) 16:56, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the term "six year itch" is in very common usage either. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:01, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the 6-year itch is that it falls on a midterm election. So, you can't have a 4-year itch (or an 8-year itch) because those are not midterm election years. You are left with 2 and 6 years as the options. I assume nobody cares much to talk about a 2-year itch. Also, this is derived from the more common 7-year itch. So, it would need to be a number near 7. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 18:44, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why only the midterms? Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 18:51, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

After four years a sitting president runs for reelection. This is often successful (Obama, Bush Jr., Clinton, Reagan, ...). The successful presidential campaign may pull the House and Senate elections along by the coattail effect. Maybe somebody can provide some data? --Wrongfilter (talk) 19:02, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have not looked at the data, so I don't know if the claimed pattern is statistically significant, compared for example with a dip for the sitting president's party after their (almost) first two years in office, as in:

the "shellacking"^[3] of Obama in the 2010 midterm elections with the Republicans winning control of the House,
a similar loss after almost two years of Trump in the 2018 midterm elections with the Democrats regaining control of the House,
and again after almost two years of Biden in the 2022 midterm elections with the Republicans again winning the House.

If there is national disgruntlement after the first four years, neither the president nor their party win in the elections. Apparently no one has named this not uncommon event with some catchy name; if someone tried, it did not catch on. ‑‑Lambiam 20:11, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 6

HMS Warspite refit in 1941

HMS Warspite (03) went for repairs and refit in the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in 1941. This apparently included a replacement of her main armament, consisting of 8 BL 15-inch Mk I naval guns. Now I can understand how a US shipyard can perform many repairs on a battleship - it's mostly steel, and similar principles apply around the world. But battleship guns are very specialised items of equipment, and rare enough that the mere existence of some used spares spurred Britain to build HMS Vanguard (23) around them. So I doubt that the US industry simply built the Brits news guns. Does anyone know where the replacement guns for Warspite came from? Where they shipped in from Britain? Or is there something I've overlooked? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:33, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on the guns says "186 guns were manufactured between 1912 and 1918. They were removed from ships, refurbished, and rotated back into other ships over their lifetime." DuncanHill (talk) 23:38, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The guns were shipped across from Britain, each separate to ensure the armament would not be lost in one sinking. They were sent to Norfolk Naval Base and then moved by rail across to Bremerton. See Ballantyne 2013. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 23:50, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that helps! What exactly is "Ballantyne 2013"? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:14, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above user is referring to a book in the bibligraphy. Specifically, this one. Kylemahar902 (talk) 15:59, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found this book which seems to suggest that the Brits did in fact order the guns from the US. See page 7. Hope I could help. (edit: Maybe not from the US, actually just says they were ordered. Not seeing any recorded manufacturer. Will update if I find anything else.)Kylemahar902 (talk) 16:18, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Knowing little about naval gunnery, this is as far as I can go. I found this incredibly well sourced page about the guns you're referring to. It tells you where all the shells for the guns were manufactured, and by whom, but not the guns. I'd suggest taking a look at this and going through the bibliography. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_15-42_mk1.php Good luck in your quest. Kylemahar902 (talk) 16:33, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seamen's Church, San Pedro CA

I have a mystery for you. Is the Norwegian Seamen's Church, San Pedro the same as this picture from 1922? https://seamenschurch-archives.org/files/original/32d94c469f894f6680f822789042d1b4.jpg

I lay out everything I was able to figure out here: Talk:Louis L'Amour#The Seaman's Institute in San Pedro CA --Guy Macon Alternate Account (talk) 21:12, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(1) The address of the church building according to the Article lede is 1035 Beacon Street, not 1045.

(2) The exterior and interior views in the Article do not seem to me to be consistent with the 1922 building exterior at "10450 Beacon Street".

A church is (to be pedantic) a defined congregation of people, not the building(s) it meets in. I think it plausible that the congregation moved from one building to another, perhaps several times, within the same area as necessitated by size requirements, building conditions, building ownership, or other factors. It's also plausible that a Seaman's Mission (and/or Institute) and a Church in the same neighborhood might have had a long-standing interrelationship, perhaps even at periods sharing the same building(s) or being effectively merged. Either or both might have utilised more than one building simultaneously, using one as a Church and the other as a Mission/Institute (which implies dining, sleeping and other facilities), and of course either or both might have changed their names at some points. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.149.230 (talk) 22:10, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to be pedantic, you need to be right with it. The first definition of "church" from OED is "A building for public Christian worship or rites such as baptism, marriage, etc., traditionally cruciform in shape, and typically having a tower, dome, or spire; distinguished originally from an oratory or place of private prayer." DuncanHill (talk) 00:02, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tell that to the members of the Jerusalem Church, who might be supposed to have priority in this matter. But seriously, I wasn't trying to pick holes, but rather point out some possible factors explaining the discrepancies. If you like, insert "also" after my "A church is . . .".{The poster formerly known as 87.81.213.195} 90.210.149.230 (talk) 05:17, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt these members spoke English. The name "Jerusalem church" for this congregation was introduced only centuries later. The New Testament uses ἐκκλησία (ekklēsia); for example, Acts 11:22 has τῆς ἐκκλησίας τῆς ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις — "of the church in Jerusalem". Paul's epistles too use ἐκκλησία for such congregations; for example, both 1 Corinthans 1:2 and 2 Corinthians 1:1 have τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῇ οὔσῃ ἐν Κορίνθῳ — "to the church of God in Corinth". Assuming Aramaic was spoken by Peter and other members of the Jerusalem church, we can only guess which terms they used themselves to refer to their small sect. The etymon of English church, κυριακόν (kuriakon), meant "[the House] of the Lord" – i.e., the place of worship. ‑‑Lambiam 08:45, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All true, but my point was that whatever word was used by 'The Jesus Movement' in pre-70 BCE Jerusalem,, it referred to the group of people involved, not to the particular building they utilised at any particular time. In any case, this is becoming a distraction (mea culpa) from Guy Macon's OP about the identities (in two senses) of various buildings and their users in San Pedro. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.149.230 (talk) 20:14, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Norwegian Seamen's Church, San Pedro, as seen in this photo, is clearly not the same building as that seen in the 1922 photo. ‑‑Lambiam 08:59, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of Beacon Street ("some of San Pedro’s most iconic buildings") was demolished in the early 1970s - the 'Beacon Street Redevelopment zone'. (Caps from original.) The article also cites Beacon Street being a stand-in for New York in many films, so there may be hints there. Alternatively you could just write to the church. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 13:20, 7 February 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Additional note: the article says "opened in 1946 and in 1951 moved to its present location." All the best: Rich Farmbrough 13:47, 7 February 2025 (UTC).[reply]

We may be talking about two different organisations; the 1922 photograph comes from archives of the Seamen’s Church Institute’s (SCI) which is affiliated with the Episcopal Church (United States). Alansplodge (talk) 14:10, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the Norwegian Seamen's Church is very very Lutheran. Abductive (reasoning) 19:13, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 7

[UN and] Cambridge Biography Center

This seems to be a body that has no other function than awarding "Man of the year in Science and Technology" to people from Eastern Europe. For example the author of this paper was named as the “Man of the year in Science and Technology” in 1998 of Cambridge Biography Center, UK - readers will note the American spelling of the word centre.

Is this a Real Thing™ and if so is the award significant and if so where can we find a reliable source for it?

All the best: Rich Farmbrough 13:11, 7 February 2025 (UTC).[reply]

I think it quite likely this is a different name for the scam/award-for-hire International Biographical Centre. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:27, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. I've removed it from the article in question, as well as another similar "award" for the same person. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 18:00, 7 February 2025 (UTC).[reply]

February 8

Is Australia banned incest (between consenting adults) because of Colt clan incest case?

Australia banned incest (between consenting adults) in 2020, is this because of Colt clan incest case? 203.73.106.200 (talk) 16:15, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I gather from Legality_of_incest#Australia that incest has been banned a lot longer than that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:14, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you cite a statute or other source for the statement that incest was banned "by Australia" (i.e., federally) in 2020? Different states and territories have different laws with different definitions, enacted at different times. ‑‑Lambiam 21:10, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article and acronym identification

Evening folks!! Does anybody know what this is "W. M. of the Royal Society of Natural Scientists in Moscow". Is there any article on Wikipedia on this and what does the W.M. mean? Its concerns the Dionýz Štúr article. Is it possible to identify the "Natural Sciences Association for Styria in Graz", if there is an article on here or another WP. Thanks scope_creep^Talk 20:44, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Styrian association is the Naturwissenschaftlicher Verein für Steiermark, which has existed since 1862 and still has no WP article. --Wrongfilter (talk) 21:11, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice to know what source you are referring to. As it stands I cannot but suspect that you've google-translated this. As a result you get a language mix between the translated name of the Royal Society and the untranslated abbreviation "W. M.". The latter would then be "wirkliches Mitglied", an "actual member" or better "full member" — as opposed to a corresponding member. --Wrongfilter (talk) 21:21, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) (from the helpdesk) it would help to know where you found these phrases

de:Dionýz Štúr says he was "korrespondierendes Mitglied der Kaiserlichen Gesellschaft der Naturforscher zu Moskau" and links to Moskauer Gesellschaft der Naturforscher, i.e. Moscow Society of Naturalists
de Wikipedia has multiple mentions but no article for Naturwissenschaftlicher Verein für Steiermark. There is a website at https://nawiverein.uni-graz.at/de/ TSventon (talk) 23:12, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is excellent. Thanks folks. Any joy on the second one. scope_creep^Talk 07:35, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm half awake. I see it now. Thanks folks scope_creep^Talk 07:38, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry @Wrongfilter:, @TSventon: It was in this document: this. scope_creep^Talk 08:35, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The German article was wrong, there are two sources that describe him as "w.M." or "Wirkl. Mitglied". --Wrongfilter (talk) 09:30, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: next time, please supply the original text and source, plus a translation if you wish. The source has a list of Abkürzungen (abbreviations) linked to the left of their homepage which explains "w. M.". Also please post a link to your RD question at the helpdesk so people don't duplicate effort. TSventon (talk) 14:32, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TSventon: RD? I see that now. scope_creep^Talk 14:44, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: WP:RD is the Wikipedia reference desk, see Wikipedia:Wikipedia abbreviations#R. TSventon (talk) 14:52, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 9

museum to overalls

I recently learned a part of the costume Denver Pyle wore on The Dukes of Hazzard (TV series) were Liberty overalls. I wonder if there's a museum to overalls, including the brand I mentioned. If more information is available, please let me know. Thank you.2603:7000:863E:BDEB:AFC2:F9CF:2093:87C (talk) 02:46, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find a specific museum, but overalls feature in the collections of The Metropolitan Museum of Art and The National Museum of American History. Who knew? Alansplodge (talk) 17:03, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you also saw the trailer to the 2018 short film Daphne & Velma. At one point, the two main characters also wore overalls. What brand(s) were they wearing?2603:7000:863E:BDEB:AFC2:F9CF:2093:87C (talk) 03:38, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Anderson (Royal Marines officer)

Taking a shortcut through the Brompton Cemetery in London the other day, I was intrigued by the monument to General Alexander Anderson (Royal Marines officer) (1807-1877), that consists of a stack of cannonballs, three of which are inscribed with 'Beyrout', 'Gaza' and 'Syria'; presumably his battle honours. Our article is the thinnest of stubs and a brief bio I found here has no mention of these. So what was he and the Royal Marines doing in the Levant in the mid-19th-century? Alansplodge (talk) 17:11, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From the London and China Express Friday 18th May 1877 here in the BNA:

After fifty-four years' service on the active list, General Alexander Anderson, C. B., of the Royal Marine Light Infantry, has been placed on the retired list. The gallant officer joined the Royal Marines in 1823, and attained the age of seventy years on the 7th inst. General Anderson has seen very arduous and distinguished service. He served with the army of occupation in Portugal; was at the battle of Navarino in 1827, having at the commencement of the action boarded with his marines one of the Turkish ships and captured her flag; served throughout the Syrian campaign in 1840-1; at the storming of Sidon was the first to plant the British flag on the walls; was in the attack on and at the capture of Beyrout ; the bombardment of St. Jean d'Acre ; the surrender of Jaffa, and the expedition against Gaza. For his services in this last campaign he received the war medal with two clasps, and the Turkish silver medal from the Sultan; and was nominated a Companion of the Bath in June, 1869. He was promoted to his present rank on the 1st April, 1870. General Anderson's retirement causes a step of promotion through all the ranks of Royal Marine officers (infantry branch), and also places a colonel's good service pension of £150 a-year (that of Colonel Commandant P. C. Penrose, C. B., who becomes a Major General) at the disposal of the Lords of the Admiralty

Similar reports appeared in many local or regional papers at the time. See Oriental Crisis of 1840 and more particularly Egyptian–Ottoman War (1839–1841) for the Syrian Campaign. I am sure you know that Syria referred to a much larger area then than the modern state, but some of our readers may not. DuncanHill (talk) 17:27, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comparing the picture in our article, and the picture on the page linked from the page Alan linked to above, several of his balls have gone missing. A shame. DuncanHill (talk) 17:45, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DuncanHill yes a shame, but restored in 2018; the replaced cannonballs are a slightly lighter colour (new balls please?). I have belatedly attached a photo that I took last week. Many thanks for your prompt and detailed answer. The improvement of his article must await another cold and wet weekend, probably not a long time hence. Alansplodge (talk) 18:01, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Alansplodge: From a close perusal of the picture here, one of the balls says "Portugal" (ball 2 of the row in which ball 4 is "Beyrout"). DuncanHill (talk) 23:13, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DuncanHill; ah, well spotted. His bio at rmhistorical.com mentions that he participated in the "Portugal Civil War '27". This seems to have preceded the Liberal Wars but is not mentioned in our article, however a British force led by William Henry Clinton did indeed appear in Lisbon in 1827, although apparently there was no actual fighting. I must confess that I didn't notice any inscriptions at all when I was there, but it was just in passing. Alansplodge (talk) 22:57, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regional Municipality vs. District Municipality

Good day everyone. I'm trying to comprehend what the actual distinction is between a regional municipality and a district municipality in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia. The page for regional municipalities describes a regional municipality in Nova Scotia as:

In Nova Scotia, regional municipalities are a single level of government, and provide all municipal services to their communities. As they include both urban centres and rural areas, they are not called cities, towns or villages. Such municipalities in Nova Scotia take over the area and name of a county. Counties still exist as a geographic division but may contain a single municipality or may be divided into municipal districts within them (uncited)

The page for district municipalities defines them as:

A district municipality, also called a rural municipality, is one of three municipal types, along with towns and regional municipalities. District municipalities and county municipalities are further considered rural municipalities. The province's twelve district municipalities are referred to as municipal districts by Statistics Canada.

From this, one might infer that district municipalities exist within regional municipalities, or regional municipalities are created by amalgamating several district municipalities, but this does not seem to be the case. Then there's counties, which continue to be used as census divisions by Statistics Canada, further complicating the matter.

I haven't been able to find any information describing the difference in the structure or power of governance between the two kinds of municipalities, either. They seem to be structured the same in that both have municipal councils, but I would think a regional municipality would have a wider scope than a district municipality.

I was hoping someone here with a better understanding of regional governance than I could take a look and explain this in layman's terms, so I might be better informed on the topic when developing articles related to Nova Scotia. Thanks in advance. Kylemahar902 (talk) 20:29, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kylemahar902, Administrative divisions of Nova Scotia is a less confusing introduction than the sections you linked. It has a helpful map and explains the differences between regional municipalities formed by merger; rural municipalities, which don't include towns with municipality status and cover either a county (county municipalities) or part of a county (district municipalities); and towns with municipality status. TSventon (talk) 21:39, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for linking me that page. The Nova Scotian side of Wikipedia is a real mess, I hadn't found that one yet. That does clear things up a bit. Cheers. Kylemahar902 (talk) 13:57, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 10

Burger King Whopper size lawsuit

Is there any update on this lawsuit, filed in 2023? https://www.reuters.com/legal/burger-king-must-face-lawsuit-claiming-its-whoppers-are-too-small-2023-08-29/ How long does it usually take for lawsuits like this to go to court? I haven't found any news about it after 2023. 2601:644:907E:A70:B427:851D:7DB1:31FA (talk) 03:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This web page states, under the heading Burger King Lawsuit Background, "Filed in March 2020, the lawsuit alleges that Burger King falsely represented the size of its signature Whopper sandwiches in its advertisements." Further on, under the heading Judge’s Verdict on Burger King Lawsuit, we read, U.S. District Judge Roy Altman gave a mixed ruling. While he agreed to dismiss the lawsuit’s components regarding Burger King’s TV and online advertising potentially misleading customers, he allowed the claims of negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment to proceed. In Judge Altman’s words, the determination of whether the difference between the received and advertised products could sway purchasing decisions should be left to the consumers." This does not give closure. No reference or date for this ruling is given.

Moreover, in between, under the heading November 2024 Update – Burger King Lawsuit, the page states, "We have filed a class action lawsuit against Burger King Corporation for using false and misleading images in their advertisements that materially overstate the portion size for the Whopper. Burger King Corporation has filed a motion to dismiss this class action. We are currently waiting on a decision from the court." ‑‑Lambiam 13:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. 2601:644:907E:A70:514B:C85:7AA8:AC50 (talk) 18:20, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Cromleac

The Victoria and Albert Museum has a photograph they call "Edward Cromleac" and describe as being in "County Down, Republic of Ireland", and having been taken in the National Photographic Record and Survey. Google searches for "Edward Cromleac" return only the same image. County Down is not in the Republic of Ireland. I have identified the cromlech as the Goward Dolmen in Clonmore, Co Down. Some more pictures, which make the identification clearer, are here at Megalithic Ireland. My questions are 1) Has it ever actually been known as "Edward Cromleac", or is this an error by the original annotator of the photograph, 2) The V&A credit the photograph to R. Welch, would I be right in assuming this is Robert Welch (photographer)?, and 3) anything else of interest you can come up with. Thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 10:17, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, and 4) do we have a more reliable source than my amazing eye for detail and research skills to make the identification? The photo would improve our article if so. DuncanHill (talk) 10:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like "Edward Cromleac" should actually read "Goward Cromlech". In this picture at least "Goward" can be read. Judging by this and that, "cromleac" seems to be a valid variant of "cromlech". --Wrongfilter (talk) 10:45, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Colorised version of the preceding photo in the series, same fellow, other side. --Wrongfilter (talk) 10:57, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've just sent a feedback note on this to the V&A. --Wrongfilter (talk) 11:12, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Wrongfilter: Many thanks, now I look at the V&A picture blown up as much as I can I agree, it does actually say "Goward" not "Edward". And thanks too for contacting the V&A - I did one try to get them to correct something they'd copied of Wikipedia but I don't know if they ever did. DuncanHill (talk) 12:14, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How wee was Bobs?

There's a little red-faced man,
Which is Bobs,
Rides the tallest 'orse 'e can-
Our Bobs.

Frederick Roberts, 1st Earl Roberts was famously short. But how short was he? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 12:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This source and this one agree that he was five foot two. This concurs that he was five foot three. To make it still clearer, this says he was five foot four. Your question may be as difficult to answer as the often-debated one about Napoleon's height. Of course, Roberts was 82 by the time he faded away and might well have lost an inch or two by then. --Antiquary (talk) 21:28, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two more sources – [4] and [5] – give his height as five foot three. Bear in mind also that we're all half an inch shorter at the end of the day than at the beginning due to our vertebrae scrunching up under the strain of supporting our weight. We regain the half inch, of course, overnight. All told, it may not be possible to get more precision than 5' 3" give or take. --Antiquary (talk) 21:48, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, five foot six and a half. But then when I was learning stats I was always told to ignore the outliers. --Antiquary (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Liars, damned outliers, and statistics. ‑‑Lambiam 11:00, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yosemite Sam was much shorter than any of those, yet he rode a full-sized horse in his screen debut. He mounted it using a type of stepladder. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:22, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to break this to you, Bugs, but Yosemite Sam might not have been a completely historical, accurately depicted individual. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.8.123.129 (talk) 05:29, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Them's fightin' words! The point being that the shortest guy can ride the tallest horse, if he gets creative enough. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Antiquary: Thank you, about as tall as my Mum was then! DuncanHill (talk) 12:25, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is The Alchemist a work of magical realism?

JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 14:59, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, here are some sources discussing this novel in relation to the genre of magical realism:

There is no hard test for drawing the distinction between magical realism and fantasy with magical elements. While there are elements of magical realism in the novel that help to carry the story forward, it is a judgement call whether they suffice to characterize the whole work as magical realism. Magical elements are commonplace in fairy tales, and one might call this story a well-elaborated fairy tale presented in a somewhat realistic fashion. ‑‑Lambiam 19:17, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Holes on the face of the Serjilla roman baths building

File:Serjilla 01.jpg

There are these weird holes on the building. My first thought is bullets or something but they seem too perfect. 2A02:85F:F598:2801:2AB8:4984:FEE7:C061 (talk) 18:06, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The description of File:Serjilla_(2001)_09.jpg says "You can see the perforations in the wall to embed the beams of the roof [gable] of a later house". --Wrongfilter (talk) 19:41, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Father-son VCs

According to our article Frederick Roberts (VC, born 1872), he and his father Frederick Roberts, 1st Earl Roberts were "were one of only three father-son pairs to win the VC". Who were the other two? I would regard recipients of the Victoria Cross for Australia, the Victoria Cross (Canada), and the Victoria Cross for New Zealand as being absolutely equal to recipients of the original. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 22:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Charles Gough and Sir John Gough
Sir Walter Congreve and Billy Congreve

Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 23:03, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beat me to it by seconds! Well done. This article also records four cases where VCs have been awarded to brothers. Alansplodge (talk) 23:05, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: and @Alansplodge: Thank you both. DuncanHill (talk) 12:24, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 12

Georgia O'Keeffe

When was her first art show? 174.87.82.78 (talk) 04:08, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has an article about Georgia O'Keeffe which gives a date of 1917. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to the website of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, she had her first group show in May 1916 and her first solo show a year later, both at Alfred Stieglitz's gallery 291.^[6] According to the website of the Georgia O’Keeffe Museum, the group show was opened on May 23, 1916, and the first one-person show of her work on April 3, 1917.^[7] ‑‑Lambiam 12:44, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 13

Tea, buns, and Kenneth Grahame

"Come along inside. We'll see if tea and buns can make the world a better place" is a quotation widely, or wildly, attributed to Kenneth Grahame, specifically to The Wind in the Willows. As you should by now expect it does not appear in that work. Can anyone identify a source? Thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 00:40, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The earliest occurrence I could find, from 1999, has a different attribution: I believe it was Owl, in one of the Pooh books, who said so wisely, “Come along inside. We’ll see if tea and buns can make the world a better place.”^[8] The earliest presentation as a quotation from The Wind in the Willows I found is in a 2003 book titled The Power of a Teacup.^[9] I suppose all but the first of these false attributions blindly copied an earlier one. Grahame's book uses the phrase "Come inside and have something" and the goaler's daughter serves Toad "a tray, with a cup of fragrant tea steaming on it; and a plate piled up with very hot buttered toast, cut thick, very brown on both sides, with the butter running through the holes in it in great golden drops, like honey from the honeycomb",^[10] slightly more fancy than just buns, but there is nothing there that might evoke a suggestion that the world can be made a better place than it already is. ‑‑Lambiam 12:27, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conjecture: Maybe the quotation actually comes from a TV or film adaptation of the book. --142.112.222.162 (talk) 21:52, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or from one of the four sequels by William Horwood? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.8.123.129 (talk) 22:25, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 16

Which countries are banning the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

Of course https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1891223872814395403 is wrong. But to prove the point of not censoring consiparaciy theories, which countries are banning the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? I wouldn’t be surprised even Hungary is 1 of them. But what countries beside France currently do it ? A worldmap would be the best option. 78.245.135.28 (talk) 23:35, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i think that such - literature - would be prohibited from publication / distribution by default in a great many countries (as incitement to hatred - in the british speech /blasphemy laws, or in German Volksverhetzung 130.74.59.205 (talk) 03:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No. The book isn’t that much hatred since it doesn’t tell what to do. In France it has a specific ban issued in 1990 targetting only it because hate speech laws don’t apply to it. Conspiracy theories isn’t necessarily hate speech, hence why I expect the legal coverage is different from hate speech. 78.245.135.28 (talk) 03:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So virulently antisemitic lies aren't all that hateful because they don't explicitly tell you to do something? You have odd ideas. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As far I understand, they don’t directly call to act against jews. They lie about them which implies hate. While in France laws about hate speech date from 1972, the book got banned by decree only in 1990 because it was definitely not considered to be hate speech and printing it was definitely legal.

A conspiracy theory isn’t necessarily about hate speech. Morally we can disagree, but this is important legally. 37.170.138.99 (talk) 08:10, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you post the original question? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean ? Countries that ban hate speech don’t necessarily ban the book and hence why I want to have the full list. Countries without hate speech laws also tend to befriend Israel so I wouldn’t be surprised if Hungary makes selling the book illegal. 37.165.255.22 (talk) 05:12, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just wondered if you're an IP-hopper, and it looks like you are. I also detect an agenda. Do you support the claims made in that work of fiction? And your saying Musk was wrong about Hitler is naive to say the least. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:13, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 17

Queen Elisabeth I

Dear you!

Why did you change picture of Queen Elisabeth I from the previous one where she is standing straight with small straight nose, queen virgin is known for her perfect nose, the other pictures are women who were around her. The only accurate picture of her is the one where Image: Elizabeth I in her coronation robes, a copy of about 1600 of a lost original painting. © National Portrait Gallery, London. Please change it. WE need to give accurate information about history and religion. Thanks Vesnamd (talk) 05:37, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you're talking about. The current lead image of the article Elizabeth I has not changed in recent months. The image Elizabeth I in coronation robes is in the article. --Viennese Waltz 08:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello thank you for your reply,current image is not accuare of how she looked, But i think the image that i told you of is accuarte and was picture for her at wikipedia maybe months ago last time i looked. 185.183.146.14 (talk) 11:45, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know the current image isn't accurate? Were you there at the time? --Viennese Waltz 12:41, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps OP is thinking of Queenie from Blackadder II? I seem to recall her commenting on her own nose approvingly. I can't say I've heard of the real Good Queen Bess having a particularly notable nose. DuncanHill (talk) 13:04, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to Paul Hentzner, a German lawyer travelling in England, in 1598 (when she was 65), she had 'her eyes small, yet black and pleasant; her nose a little hooked, her lips narrow, and her teeth black (a defect the English seem subject to, from their too great use of sugar)'.^[1] Vesnamd, Her nose a little crooked. Do you like the portrait? That Gheeraerts, he was so clever, he had to be careful his foot didn't fall off. Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 13:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Archer, Ian W.; Price, F. Douglas (2024-08-01). English Historical Documents 1558-1603. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-040-24858-4.

I am not sure what the OP is complaining about. Looking back through the archives of the article, the images used have not changed in several years. Indeed, The images that appear in the various sections of the article have been in those locations going back to (at least) 2022.

That said, if you think the images need to be rearranged (or replaced with “better” images), the place to discuss that change is on the article talk page. Blueboar (talk) 13:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I gather that she also spelled her name with a "z" rather than an "s". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is same-surname marriage common in Western countries?

Is same-surname marriage common in Western countries? 220.132.216.52 (talk) 08:46, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That could depend on the name. Franklin and Eleanor were both born with the surname Roosevelt. They were distant cousins, distant enough to not be a genetic issue. And it wouldn't be at all surprising if people with extremely common surnames such as Smith or Jones have married from time to time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:15, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not "common" because there are millions of different surnames in Western countries, as opposed to the article you linked which is about Eastern countries where there is a more limited range of surnames. See surname. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an example: Singer Patti Smith married rock guitarist Fred "Sonic" Smith in 1980. They were completely unrelated. He was from West Virginia and she was born in Chicago. They had two children and were married for 14 years until Fred's sudden death from a heart attack at age 46. Cullen328 (talk) 09:50, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are 566,946 families called Smith in the UK, [11] representing about 1.2% of our 68 million population, [12] so I imagine that inter-Smith marriages are not too uncommon.

In Wales, 13.84% of the population are called Jones and 7.09% are called Davies, many of the latter living in a single county. [13] Alansplodge (talk) 19:29, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How common is Evans? We used to have a radio announcer here in Melbourne, Australia called Peter Evans. His article tells us "...he often referred to himself in the traditional Welsh form of "Evans the Wireless", whereby a person's occupation was used as part of their identifier." HiLo48 (talk) 23:05, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As explained in the above responses, there's no taboo against it, but it's not common simply due to the diversity of surnames. This maybe-reliable source suggests that even within a single country of origin, the most common surname is held by barely over 1% of the population. It may have been more common in times when a lot of people lived their whole lives in small villages and towns and rarely met strangers, and so were all to some degree related. It's undoubtedly more common between people with common surnames.

There is a taboo against marrying people who are closely related, which does put a damper on same-surname marriage. For almost anyone in the West, most of the people you know who share your surname will be relatives.

These days, most people are totally fine with marriage between third cousins (people who share one set of great-great grandparents) -- since it's rare for people to know their third cousins well if at all. Second cousin (people who share one set of great-grandparents) marriage isn't an issue genetically (in terms of inbreeding), but still makes some people uncomfortable. I for one knew most of my second cousins as a child, and would find the idea of marrying them weird.

There was a time when marriage between first cousins was considered permissible (if not ideal) in parts of the West. Or even desirable under certain circumstances relating to consolidation of power or resources (see also the tangled European royal family trees). That's fallen out of favor in the 20th and 21st centuries and would now be considered taboo in most places.

Some of this is detailed in our article on cousin marriage. -- Avocado (talk) 14:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Heath of the US president

First of all: SPOILER ALERT. The question may involve a spoiler for the film Captain America: Brave New World, so if you did not see the film but plan to do so, please avoid this section.

...and now that we said that, let's go on. One of the lead characters of the film Captain America: Brave New World is the president of the United States (a fictional one, Thunderbolt Ross, played by Harrison Ford). At the end of the film it turns out that, like Bruce Banner before him, he can turn into a Hulk. Meaning, a destructive and superpowerful monster (as in, he demolished the White House as if he was a bull in a China shop), and he has very limited control over the transformation or his actions once transformed. There's the usual big superhero fight of the film's finale, he's defeated and back to human, and we know in the epilogue that he has resigned and agreed to be kept prisoner in a prison that can contain him.

Which begs the question: what if he didn't? The old Ross surely wouldn't have. What if a US president gets health problems that make him unable to properly serve as president (perhaps not to that extreme, but let's suppose so), but refuses to resign? Cambalachero (talk) 17:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Vice-President and members of the presidential cabinet tell the Senate that the president is unable to perform the duties of the office. The VP becomes acting president until the actual fitness of the president can be assessed. I assume Secret Service agents or even military personnel would be used to physically detain the president if needed. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 17:58, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The President is the head of the Executive Branch of the government, which places the President in charge of the military and the Secret Service. As soon at the new President takes the oath of office, the old President is no longer in power at all and is technically tresspassing if they refuse to leave office. It is trivial to order proper law enforcement to arrest and remove the old President because, in real life, nobody turns into a magical creature with super powers. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 18:45, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe confine him with Heath bars. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:25, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They might gnaw their way through. Just like vampires can be warded off with garlic, a circle of fresh crops of lettuce may have a stronger confining effect on some former presidents ‑‑Lambiam 11:12, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of like JFK, whose inaugural address contained the statement, "Lettuce begin." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:05, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In 1919, President Woodrow Wilson suffered a stroke and was partially paralyzed and blind and couldn't do much. No one was allowed to visit him except for a very few. Vice President Thomas R. Marshall made no attempt in trying to call Wilson unable to serve the presidency. 115.188.71.85 (talk) 09:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care about the spoiler, because I have no intention of seeing the film. I'm just saying that you could have asked your question perfectly well without it. Your post could have started with the words "What if a US president..." and nothing would have been lost. --Viennese Waltz 10:05, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 18

Thomas Sankara political thought

On Thomas Sankara’s article, I strongly disagree with him being labelled as a “Marxist revolutionary” and instead would describe him as a Marxist inspired socialist. Is this not misleading by misinterpreting his political view? Petrosm7 (talk) 11:10, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it seems that he considered himself to be a revolutionary. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:02, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One can be a socialist and a revolutionary, or a socialist but not a revolutionary, or not a socialist but a revolutionary, or neither a socialist nor a revolutionary. After attaining power, Sankara created, following the Cuban model, Comités de Défense de la Révolution (Committees for the Defense of the Revolution) and set up a new system of courts, called the Tribunaux populaires de la Révolution (People's Revolutionary Tribunals)). While it is defensible to call him a coupist,^[14] his own preference was clearly to see the coup as "revolutionary".

The distinction between "Marxist" and "Marxism-inspired" is hard to draw, because many self-avowed Marxists paint other self-avowed Marxists as not being "true" Marxists. The analysis of society in terms of dialectical materialism and class struggle found in his Women's Liberation and the African Freedom Struggle^[15] is undeniable Marxist, but this need not mean that he embraced all theses of classical Marxism, and most likely he did not, just like many Marxism-inspired African thinkers aspiring to social justice before him.. ‑‑Lambiam 12:08, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very well written thank you. You made the point that I believe in when you said, “ "Marxist" and "Marxism-inspired" is hard to draw, because many self-avowed Marxists paint other self-avowed Marxists as not being "true" Marxists.” Even though I am not Marxist I understand it’s a fine line as Sankara did not embrace a one party system or emphasise a global proletariat revolution, but his writings were indeed Marxist. It just depends whether you count thoughts or actions as depicting overall political view. Petrosm7 (talk) 13:23, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Archer, Ian W.; Price, F. Douglas (2024-08-01). English Historical Documents 1558-1603. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-040-24858-4.

[1]