Wikipedia:Reference desk/all

Wikipedia Reference Desk – All recent questions	Search Wikipedia:
WP:RD/ALL redirects here. You may also be looking for Wikipedia:Resolving disputes, Wikipedia:Redirect or Wikipedia:Deletion review. This page lists all the recent questions asked on the Wikipedia reference desk by category. To ask a new question, please select one of the categories below. To answer a question, click on the "edit" link beside the question. Return to the Reference Desk main page... For information on any topic, choose a category for your question:
Computers and IT Science Mathematics Humanities Computing, information technology, electronics, software and hardware Biology, chemistry, physics, medicine, geology, engineering and technology Mathematics, geometry, probability, and statistics History, politics, literature, religion, philosophy, law, finance, economics, art, and society Language Entertainment Miscellaneous Archives Spelling, grammar, word etymology, linguistics, language usage, and requesting translations Sports, popular culture, movies, music, video games, and TV shows Subjects that don't fit in any of the other categories Old questions are archived daily Help desk Village pump Ask general questions about using Wikipedia Ask about specific policies and operations of Wikipedia Help manual MediaWiki handbook Citing Wikipedia Resolving disputes Virtual classroom Information and instructions on every aspect of Wikipedia Information about the software that runs Wikipedia How to cite Wikipedia as a reference For resolving issues between users An advanced guide on everything Wikipedia See also the Wikipedia department directory
The following images are being used under the GNU FDL and/or the CC-BY-SA license: P computing.svg, P physics.svg, P mathematics.svg, P question.svg, P art.png, P literature.svg, P music.svg, P archive.svg, P Airplane.png

May 22

What is the computational power Q of the world's best N=16-Rechenwerk device?

What is the computational power Q of the world's best N=16-Rechenwerk device? For the meaning of the word "N=16-Rechenwerk", please see German Wikipedia de:Wikipedia:Auskunft/Archiv/2025/Woche_19#Für_eine_gegebene_natürliche_Zahl_N:_Wie_nennt_man_ein_technisches_Gerät,_das_die_in_dieser_Frage_beschriebene_mathematische_Funktion_möglichst_effizient_berechnen_kann?! 2003:ED:B722:800:B46D:A520:F44C:58CF (talk) 11:49, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Edited a link. --CiaPan (talk) 11:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Hard to tell, because the speed of supercomputers like El Capitan is typically given in FLOPS, which is not relevant here. In one step there seem to be two fetches and a store. They are mostly of consecutive locations, so a pipeline architecture will accelerate that, but I think memory access will be the bottleneck; much of the arithmetic can be implemented efficiently as bitwise operations. It looks that with some analysis the computation process can also be parallelized. On a single core, one step may take maybe 10 ns, so 10 million cores can do perhaps 10¹⁵ steps per second. For the about 10⁶ steps needed for N = 16, this would then take one nanosecond. Note that this is at best a ballpark figure; it may be off by orders of magnitude.  ​‑‑Lambiam 16:57, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

May 23

Just my concern about Analytic geometry

block evasion
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
This picture in this article Analytic geometry#/media/File:Stereographic projection in 3D.svg can be changed to this rather, https://drive.google.com/file/d/11LIxCSDGHHScIrgrJOX-6MfiDE4nS6D4/view?usp=sharing. Unfortunately, that cannot be done as I've said, as the picture I'm referring is from the cine world, I mean the cinema as because Concerning analytic geometry I think this topic which was added earlier - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAnalytic_geometry&diff=712799894&oldid=712292654 is somewhat relevant in this Talk:Analytic_geometry which was closed and got removed from the Talk Page. He'd gone little outrageous and he made his addition to this talk page which is gibberish, so it got removed. However by Conic Sections we cannot intrude our own world, as, coz, because it is just in 2D. First of all 3D is different. Prior to make our own assumptions on String Theory, we must speculate clearly as because Conic Sections and this analytic geometry sees things that is in / on only in 2D aspect as we know, so it is very dangerous if at all if it is applied to 3D object, clear analysis and clear speculation is very much required before we approach Editorial team please accord by so and make necessary edits in this Article - Analytic Geometry. — ~~~~ User:AtTEnigma (talk) 11:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC) Is there a question here? Wikipedia has no editorial team. See Wikipedia:About. The image in the article is that of the infobox Template:General geometry, found on many articles on geometric topics, Absolute geometry, Bernhard Riemann, Circumference, ..., Zero-dimensional space. In no way is it meant to be specific to analytic geometry – although analytic geometry is a useful tool for working out the equations of the stereographic projection.  ​‑‑Lambiam 16:32, 23 May 2025 (UTC) Then I suggest that the image doesn't belong in that template, as it misleads the reader into thinking that it's relevant to the specific geometrical topic. In fact, based that's not an infobox, it's a navbox that's being placed like an infobox. (Opinion ends.) --142.112.140.58 (talk) 23:29, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

May 27

Re: Fandom

The WP article states that Jimmy Wales (who everyone already knows co-founded the platform we're on now) remained on this farm's staff as late as 2018. Per Fandom's own About page, just wanted to make sure if he's still with them in the current TPG era. (H/T this overview at Shout's Anti-Wikia Alliance [AWA].)

(DISCLOSURE: This contributor was a former Wikian, but has long since moved on^{currently on Miraheze}.) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 21:10, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

May 19

Does Wikipedia contain a contradiction about whether, the speed of light is only constant in inertial frames of reference?

On the one hand, our article special relativity states:

• In the lead: "The speed of light in vacuum is the same for all observers, regardless of the motion of light source or observer".
• In the chapter background: "Two observers in relative motion receive information about two events via light signals traveling at constant speed, independent of either observer's speed".
• In the chapter History: "James Clerk Maxwell presented a theory of electromagnetism...The theory specifically predicted a constant speed of light in vacuum, no matter the motion (velocity, acceleration, etc.) of the light emitter or receiver."
• In the chapter Reference frames and relative motion: "the speed of light is constant in relativity irrespective of the reference frame".

.

So it seems that the speed of light is constant, also in non-inertial frames of reference.

.

On the other hand, that article also states:

• In that chapter: "light in vacuum propagates with the speed c (a fixed constant, independent of direction) in at least one system of inertial coordinates".
• In the chapter Basis: The two postulates both concern observers moving at a constant speed relative to each other.
• In the chapter Lack of an absolute reference frame: "the speed of light in vacuum is always measured to be c, even when measured by multiple systems that are moving at different (but constant) velocities".
• in our article Postulates of special relativity, in the chapter Postulates of special relativity: "As measured in any inertial frame of reference, light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c that is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body. Or: the speed of light in free space has the same value c in all inertial frames of reference".
• In our article speed of light, in the lead: "Albert Einstein postulated that the speed of light c with respect to any inertial frame of reference is a constant...Such particles and waves travel at c regardless of the motion of the source or the inertial reference frame of the observer".
• In that article, in the chapter Fundamental role in physics: "The speed at which light waves propagate in vacuum is independent both of the motion of the wave source and of the inertial frame of reference of the observer...In non-inertial frames of reference (gravitationally curved spacetime or accelerated reference frames), the local speed of light is constant and equal to c, but the speed of light can differ from c when measured from a remote frame of reference".

.

So it seems that the speed of light is only constant in inertial frames of reference.

.

I wonder if the second set of quotes contradicts the first one. HOTmag (talk) 19:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

The implicit assumption in the first set is that the observer shares the frame of reference with the measuring instrument.  ​‑‑Lambiam 12:08, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Of course, but what about two measuring instruments that accelerate relative to each other? Will they measure the same speed of light, according to each set of quotes mentioned in my original post? HOTmag (talk) 00:04, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

In an inertial frame of reference you can make a local clock by observing a light package bouncing between two parallel motionless mirrors, which can serve as the basis for setting up a coordinate system. The problem is really in how to define a non-local coordinate system from a non-inertial frame of reference. You can write in your lab notes, "Event E was observed at position (x₁, y₁, z₁) at time t₁." How did you measure the values of these non-local coordinates? Will they still be in any sense meaningful at time t₂? Is the space point (x₁, y₁, z₁) still "where it was" at time t₁?  ​‑‑Lambiam 16:31, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm referring now to your last three questions: Why can they only be asked when the frame of reference is (non-locally) accelerating, and not when the frame of reference is (non-locally) moving without acceleration? HOTmag (talk) 10:28, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

@Lambiam: Before it's archived... HOTmag (talk) 06:29, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

At least according to the theory of special relativity, clocks at different locations in the same inertial frame run at the same rate. This allows the observer to set up a consistent time coordinate. And if A, B and C are at rest with respect to an inertial frame, with B halfway between A and C, it remains halfway. More generally, if their locations are collinear, their relative positions on the line remain unchanged. This suffices to set up a spatial coordinate system.  ​‑‑Lambiam 07:11, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Do your last two responses only show, that measuring the speed of light in a non-inertial frame of reference - is not "meaningful" only (as implied by your middle question in your previous response before your last one), or you also think that - measuring the speed of light (in vacuum) in different non-inertial frames of reference - really result in different values? HOTmag (talk) 09:53, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

May 20

Is there such a thing as a "heavy gunner" in real life?

You see this in video games a lot. A soldier who is dressed head to toe in a thick kevlar suit/helmet and ballistic plates shooting an LMG or a gattling gun. Often sent out in front of everyone else to cause as much damage to the enemy as possible while standing there and enduring their return gunfire. Does this exist in real life? 146.200.107.90 (talk) 01:58, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Only the ones who ride rhinoceri. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:42, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Even if the bullets don't penetrate the armor, their momentum is transferred to the lone vanguard soldier (see Physics of firearms § Transfer of energy). The momentum of a bullet fired by an AK-47 is about 6 kg⋅m⋅s⁻¹. (See the info box, Ballistic performance, of 7.62×39mm; this supposes that the bullets don't bounce back, otherwise the imparted momentum is higher.) At 10 rounds per second, the effect of one rifle on automatic continually hitting its target is an effective force of 6 kg⋅m⋅s⁻¹ × 10 s⁻¹ = 60 kg⋅m⋅s⁻², about 6 g. For a lighter machine gun like the Colt IAR6940 I still get some 4.5 g. The warrior will have a hard time advancing.  ​‑‑Lambiam 11:44, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Wouldn't the g-force experienced depend on the weight of the soldier? Alien878 (talk) 08:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

According to Newton's laws the shootee would be pushed back less hard than the sum of the shooters' recoil as they are not getting the full force of the gases leaving the gun. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:19, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I think the step from 60 kg⋅m⋅s⁻² to 6 g is incorrect. G-force is a type of acceleration(specifically specific force), but 60 kg⋅m⋅s⁻² is a force. to turn it into an acceleration you have to divide by the weight the force is acting on, the soldier. this gets 60 kg⋅m⋅s⁻² ÷ 65 kg = 0.9 m⋅s⁻², which gives about 0.09 g. Math Bard (talk) 00:53, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

In real life this would be a suicidal tactic, so not one that would be routinely planned for by officers, or willingly performed by most soldiers. A few unusually brave individuals may have done similar things in unusual and desperate situations, for which they might well have been awarded a (probably posthumous) decoration. {The poster formerly known as as 87.812.230.195} 94.1.170.37 (talk) 13:53, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

An unfortunate 'lol' at your 'probably posthumously' there. —Fortuna, imperatrix 14:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

• It depends what he had for breakfast. —Fortuna, imperatrix 14:26, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm surprised nobody mentioned the North Hollywood shootout. Abductive (reasoning) 14:55, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

One Mr Edward Kelly was an early pioneer of armour vs firearms tactics, although he didn't use or face automatic weapons or machine guns. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.170.37 (talk) 15:41, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Curiously, Heavy gun is a redirect to Heavy machine gun, but most occurrences of "heavy gun" appear to refer to crew-served artillery. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 16:42, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

An example from the First World War was the Italian Compagnie della morte of late 1915, who were tasked with cutting enemy barbed wire with pliers and wore medieval-style armour.

See this image. Not terribly successful, one Italian officer wrote; "Before going out to attack, they send men with pliers to remove the wires from the enemy fences. Ordinarily, neither pliers nor men return". Alansplodge (talk) 17:34, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Looking at the history, that redirect is positively antediluvian. If you're confident there's a better target (er, pun unintended), I'd say go for it -- Avocado (talk) 16:55, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I've pointed it to Large-calibre artillery. I have insufficient knowledge to be sure it's the best, but it is definitely better than before. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 20:43, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

The short answer, as people have indicated above is no. However, the video-game/media trope has connections with real-life tactics such as Shock troops and Infantry weapons officer. The problem is the trade-off between power and speed. Eluchil404 (talk) 21:36, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Contaminated oil

If oil which has been contaminated with seawater is used to fuel an oil-burning steam locomotive (assuming that the temperature is above freezing, so that ice crystal formation is not an issue), is there likely to be an immediate (= within no more than a few hours) failure of the burners in the firebox? Or would the engine be OK for a few days while the maintenance department (or the logistics department, or the fueling department if there is one) gets the problem sorted out? 2601:646:8082:BA0:2C:610F:A84:CB25 (talk) 22:32, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

The burners in steam locomotive fireboxes were made of iron or steel. The salt in seawater causes them to corrode through a process called oxidation. But this is not the end of the world.  If caught early, a technician in the maintenance department should be able to resolve the problem without causing significant long-term damage. Stanleykswong (talk) 06:49, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

The oxidation process is also known as rusting.  ​‑‑Lambiam 07:43, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Right, I'm aware of corrosion -- what I wanted to know, though, is whether this could cause more immediate problems, e.g. through phase separation causing blockages in the burners and/or fuel lines (analogously to what would happen to a diesel in this scenario)? 2601:646:8082:BA0:95F1:4DFA:95FD:527C (talk) 11:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Even under normal operation, burner and fuel line blockage is inevitable. There is no doubt that the salt in seawater increases the risk. Stanleykswong (talk) 11:23, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Per GWR oil burning steam locomotives, the oil was heated by steam to make it flow, then atomised by steam in the burner to allow rapid combustion. The atomisers had to be removed and cleaned daily. With that level of interaction with steam, and daily maintenance, I doubt that salt water contamination would cause noticeable blockages or further degradation. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 17:31, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

So here's what I really wanted to know: in "Thomas to the Rescue" (where all the diesels break down due to seawater contamination of their fuel and Thomas has to bring them fresh fuel from the depot), had Victor and Timothy (the only two oil-burning steamies on Sodor) been on the NWR at the time (they weren't introduced until much later), would they have broken down as well? (Yes, I'm aware that diesels and oil burner (engine)s use fuel with different volatility parameters, but let's ignore that point in this case!) 2601:646:8082:BA0:95F1:4DFA:95FD:527C (talk) 22:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Steam is less corrosive than salt water. Salt water contains large amounts of chlorides, which are more corrosive to metals due to electrochemical reactions, especially at high temperatures and pressures.

There is no mention in the GWR archives of what atomizer design they used. Of course, for a large engine, using steam sounds like it would make more sense than using air. Also, they did not mention whether the water was pre-treated before use. There is no mention in the GWR archives of what atomizer design they used. Of course, for a large engine, using steam sounds like it would make more sense than using air.

Also, they did not mention whether the water was pre-treated before use. In the electronics industry, deionized water is used to clean printed circuit boards, and it is possible that they used a similar process (maybe a more primitive approach) to remove mineral ions from the water. Or, did they use steam injection or other method to physically remove dissolved oxygen from the water before using it? Stanleykswong (talk) 06:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

OK, never mind the corrosion (it takes weeks for corrosion to start causing trouble) -- what about more immediate failure modes, like an atomizer blockage or a chemistry-related combustion upset of some sort? 2601:646:8082:BA0:95F1:4DFA:95FD:527C (talk) 21:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

This depends on the design of the atomizer.  If it is a pressure atomizer, the design is relatively simple. It is actually an oil nozzle, very similar to a sprayer for gardening. If corrosion causes the atomizer to become clogged, simply removing and cleaning the nozzle may resolve the problem. Stanleykswong (talk) 21:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

As stated in the GWR article (and cited to Griffiths 1987, available here, pp.123-124), the GWR ended up with Laidlaw-Drew atomisers, possibly like this.

The same book, p.69, confirms that the GWR had long used water treatment for boiler water, and though was directed to extending boiler life, it would probably have benefitted the atomisers by reducing particulates and dissolved minerals.

Here is a detailed diagram. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 22:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Right, but in this case we're talking about water dissolved in the fuel oil as received by the railroad, not water in the form of steam injected into the nozzles to help atomize the oil (which is normal, and which uses purified water from the boiler, as you correctly pointed out). In other words, a scenario similar to that in "Thomas to the Rescue"! 2601:646:8082:BA0:95F1:4DFA:95FD:527C (talk) 01:48, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

You are asking what would happen in an already fictional situation if the writer had written it differently. The fact is, that anything that would suit the story could happen, up to and including Thomas turning green, the er... physically-enhanced Controller resigning, and pigs flying. If you want to ask a science question, you should specify the grade of oil, the concentration of seawater, and the design of the atomiser and associated pipework. Anyway, I was taught that oil and water don't mix. Wouldn't the seawater separate out and float on top? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 17:16, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

To be fair, the author Wilbert Awdry was knowlegeable (for an amateur) about railways and, outside of the fantastic elements of sapient locomotives and rolling stock, attempted to be as realistic as possible in his plots, many of which were based on or inspired by actual incidents on real-life UK railways.

That said, the OP's deliberate ignoring of the fact that diesel fuel and locomotive fuel oil are two completely different things combusted in completely different equipment, and would not have suffered from the same contamination (unless by two acts of sabotage), in my view rather negates any point of discussing the minutiae of oil-burning locomotives. And as others have explained, seawater-contaminated fuel oil might have caused minor corrosion of parts, but would not have caused a quick breakdown, as seawater in diesel fuel would.

[Edited to add] Note that due to the constant physical agitation endured by a running locomotive, the seawater and fuel oil would, I suggest, probably remain in an emulsified mix rather than settling out. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 22:03, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

References

Thanks for the constructive and on-point answer (for once -- Verbarson's latest comment was completely unhelpful, and those of the others were well-meaning but misunderstood the question) -- so, the answer to my question would be "probably not", is that correct? (BTW, the reason why I chose to knowingly ignore the difference in fuel grade is because of the detailed context -- as I think I already have said in an earlier comment, I'm doing some preliminary work on a Thomas & Friends-themed add-on for Train Sim Classic and/or Train Sim World, and this question has to do with one of the scenarios I'm planning, which will be based on "Thomas to the Rescue" -- and in Train Sim Classic at least, oil-burning steamies use the same fueling facilities as diesels (I checked!) And I'm actually kind of glad that the answer to my question is no -- this scenario would already be a marathon of a mission, with the player (driving Thomas) having to haul a train 2-3 times heavier than the normal load for his type all the way up and down the main line (and down and up a few of the branches as well), so I guess the player could do without having to make an extra trip to the china clay quarry to drop off fuel for Timothy!) 2601:646:8082:BA0:95F1:4DFA:95FD:527C (talk) 06:22, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Mostly it would, but a small amount (maybe not even all that small, it could range as high as a few parts per thousand) would remain in the oil as an emulsion (had the separation been complete, there would have been no need for desalting/dewatering the oil at refineries, but the fact is, all of them have desalters installed upstream of the atmospheric distillation unit) -- and also, depending on the grade of oil, the water could actually sink to the bottom upon separation (which could lead to it physically displacing the oil from the fuel line, causing immediate burner flameout regardless of the design of the burner), could it not? Also, this is a science question -- I am asking what would happen in a real-life scenario similar to the fictional one which the Reverend had come up with (don't forget, many of his Thomas stories were actually based on real-life incidents he had personally seen or heard about, including one in which he had personally given his train the highball too early by mistake and stranded his passengers)! As for your question re. fuel specs, just for the sake of the argument, let's go with, say, #4 fuel oil and a seawater concentration of, say, 2000 ppm (which, had it been in diesel fuel instead, would be plenty high enough to cause immediate failure of any diesel engine unfortunate enough to use that batch of fuel, or at least that's what my sources tell me!) 2601:646:8082:BA0:95F1:4DFA:95FD:527C (talk) 21:53, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

May 23

DMEM (explain the joke?)

https: //mander.xyz/pictrs/image/12b51d24-e090-4a6b-9cf7-b6ec674d99c3.jpeg What is this stuff? Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:A690:D665:179B:79F0 (talk) 12:00, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Eagle's minimal essential medium. Not sure about the joke though. I assume it's a single node in some gigantic meme-based causal network i.e. you had to be there. Sean.hoyland (talk) 15:24, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

The image is a cut-out of a stock photo. The fridge itself is a household fridge, not a typical lab fridge, even though the image is used by a provider of refrigerators that comply with laboratory standards. The posting (of May 19) is on Facebook here. I don't get the joke, but many of the jokes on the user's page are super nerdy, supposed to appeal to people working in biochemistry labs.  ​‑‑Lambiam 16:00, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks all, I suspect none of us are really missing much. 2601:644:8581:75B0:A690:D665:179B:79F0 (talk) 17:39, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

It probably is a joke about men consuming protein powder to build muscles, but here using an enhanced amino acid growth medium instead. A man is not merely reduced to a body full of muscle, but now to a collection cells. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:15, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

size vs age of universe, name of discrepancy

The universe is supposed to be 13.8 billion years old, while the observable part has estimated radius 90 billion light years. The discrepancy is explained by the expansion of space, particularly during the inflationary period. I'm not asking about the explanation right now. I'm just wondering whether the apparent contradiction has a name, like "so-and-so's paradox". I couldn't find anything about it by clicking in some of the relevant articles. Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:A690:D665:179B:79F0 (talk) 17:38, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

You can read comoving and proper distances. Ruslik_Zero 20:35, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

May 25

Why life is a thing in the Universe

I've been reading Abiogenesis and unless I'm mistaken it doesn't answer the question, or maybe I'm reading the wrong stuff. Non-philosophically speaking, is there a point for life in the Universe or it's an unanswerable question? As in, do habitable planets possibly exist for an objective reason? Matt714931 (talk) 13:27, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

I wonder whether you might be interested in Blaise Agüera y Arcas's work and his book, or the first part anyway. Sean.hoyland (talk) 14:33, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

It's a question that science can't answer, because there's no way to test any hypotheses about it. Science answers "how", not "why" -- questions of causality, not intent. (When science answers a "why" question like "why is the sky blue?" it's really answering the question of "due to what mechanism", not "for what purpose".) Plenty of people have speculated about the purpose of life, but that's philosophy, not science. -- Avocado (talk) 16:01, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

One of the few things philosophers and scientists agree on is that asking for the meaning of life, the universe, and everything, is not within the province of science. This applies not only to the question, "what does it all mean?", but even to the question, "does it mean anything?".  ​‑‑Lambiam 21:52, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

@Matt714931. Unfortunately we don't yet have a philosophy reference desk, and we are not supposed to speculate here, but we do have an interesting article on the meaning of life. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:52, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Actually, the Humanities desk is supposed to cover philosophy anongst other areas, but of course it's for answerable questions, not extended discussions of unresolved ones. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 23:29, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

As I stated I was looking for an "non-philosophically speaking" (and especially anthropocentric) answer. Maybe I didn't phrase it correctly, I'm more looking into finding out theories as to why there is life at all, when it does not seem to change anything (no relationships) from the standpoint of Existence, i.e. the Universe. Things were around before the Earth was habitable and things are going to be around after. The conumdrum is even bigger if we're indeed a biological rarity. Whether the Earth is a barren crater or not doesn't seem to change anything. Matt714931 (talk) 18:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

You might as well ask "what is the point" of the universe itself. There's nothing in science that requires there to be a "point" for the existence of something. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:27, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Why there is life at all could be because it is inevitable. At the very least, it changes the amount of computation and complexity, locally anyway. Sean.hoyland (talk) 18:31, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh, you said anthropocentric ... there's the Anthropic principle which says that we can't observe the absence of life since that would entail the absence of us. Physics presumably doesn't entail life, so far as we know. This depends on how likely life is, which is an open question.  Card Zero  (talk) 21:44, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

The deeper question is Why is there anything at all?. DMacks (talk) 00:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The Creator is uber-Trumpian in his Supreme Narcissism. He requires there to be sentient beings to adore and worship Him forever. Rocks and gases can't do that, so we're the next cab off the rank. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:59, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

The purpose of life is to keep the Supreme Fascist’s "score" low by acting in good conscience.^[1]  ​‑‑Lambiam 21:43, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Abiogenesis (the origin of life) remains a mystery, and the mechanisms of how organisms arise naturally from non-living matter remain controversial. Scientists are generally believed that life on Earth originated from a series of chemical reactions that gave rise to complex molecules, which then evolved into self-replicating systems and eventually cells. If this process can occur on Earth, then it should be able to occur anywhere in the universe given the right conditions. Stanleykswong (talk) 06:30, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

May 29

Extended Gaumt vision?

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hd2XrjFBXW0

The research mentioned appears to relate to using direct stimulation of cones.

Does anyone have a direct citation for the relevant paper ( if published) ?

The approach also got me thinking, various anecdotal accounts of the impacts of pharmacological effects of certain psychidelics have allegedly included increased or more vivid colors. What papers constitute a reasonable basis for explaining this mechanism, that could be used as a basis for determining if pharamocological influences, can create an enhanced cone simulation or response, simmilar in effects (although not mecahnism) to the laser 'microdose' technology developed by UC Berkely?

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

"Novel color via stimulation of individual photoreceptors at population scale".^[2]  ​‑‑Lambiam 19:30, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

May 31

More BS about Amelia?

Is there any substance to recent reports that Amelia Earhart's plane allegedly may have been found? In other words: did they actually find any plane debris at all, and if so, what type of aircraft did they find? (I'm asking this because I've seen a number of recent videos alleging to have found Amelia's plane, but all of those videos showed planes of the wrong type -- for example, one showed the remains of what looked to me like a Junkers 52, and another showed a largely intact plane which could be an Ilyushin Il-14 or Saab 90 Scandia or similar, but was in no way, shape or form even remotely like an Electra 10-E!) 2601:646:8082:BA0:20FE:78DB:A092:17F4 (talk) 08:27, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

The rumors are based on this Instagram post of January 27, 2024 by deep water exploration company Deep Sea Vision, who spotted an anomaly said to be shaped like the Lockheed Model 10 Electra, at a location that is not implausible under a new theory of a navigational error. In this article we can see (in the last illustration) an image of the anomaly next to a representation of the Lockheed. Personally, I find the similarity less than convincing.  ​‑‑Lambiam 10:14, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

I agree. It looks more like Earhart's jet, the one with swept-back wings. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:11, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

I concur -- the image looks to me more like a Chance-Vought F7U Cutlass or a Grumman F-9 Cougar, which BTW both happen to be about the same size as the Electra -- and given that our Navy has always (since at least the 1930's) performed carrier operations pretty much everywhere in the Pacific Ocean, and that carrier operations are inherently dangerous, it's very plausible that they might have lost one of those in that area! (In any case, I'm pretty sure there are more than enough aircraft of all kinds on the bottom of the Pacific to start an undersea airline!) 2601:646:8082:BA0:1DA0:4169:3D3F:16BA (talk) 21:28, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

The aircraft is unlikely to be completely intact, regardless of what it is. It would have to have survived a controlled ditching (at best), followed by impact with the seabed when it sank, and then all the effects of corrosion etc that lead to breakup of objects in the sea. The apparent 'sweep' could be the result of any of that. Certainly the image lacks anything like the detail to say for sure that is an Electra, but likewise, taking into account the likely damage, it would seem unwise to say definitively that it isn't. Anyway, we aren't being asked to pay to send an ROV down to take a look. If anyone does, we'll find out one way or another. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:47, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Earth radioactive decay contribution in Sankey diagram

A Sankey diagram illustrating a balanced example of Earth's energy budget. Line thickness is linearly proportional to relative amount of energy.^[18]

The flow diagram I once drew shows that the energy arriving at the Earth balances the energy leaving, as per its references.

As the Earth produces its own heat through radionuclide decay, shouldn't there be a flow coming in from elsewhere to join the flow "Radiated to space"? Is it negligible, or already lumped into "Absorbed by ground"?

Thanks, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 08:28, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

The total solar irradiance is about 1361 W/m². To get the incoming energy from the Sun, this needs to be multiplied by the cross-sectional area of Earth, about 127×10¹² m², giving about 173×10¹⁵ W.

According to our article Earth's internal heat budget, the flow of heat from Earth's interior to the surface (which comes in roughly equal amounts from the radiogenic heat and the primordial heat left over from the formation of Earth) is estimated to be no more than 49×10¹² W. This is less than 0.03% of the total budget, indeed a negligible fraction. It is, however, significant on the Earth's energy imbalance of about 460×10¹² W, although, AFAICS, not accounted for in ref 1 of the article Earth's energy budget.  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:46, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks very much for doing the maths, Lambiam. Guess no change is needed to the diagram then. cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 09:42, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Butia odorata or Butia capitata

If you know about Butia palms, please see c:Commons:Village pump#Butia_odorata_or_Butia_capitata. File:Butia capitata Madrid.jpg is titled and captioned as Butia capitata, but it is presented on Butia (and commons:Category:Butia odorata any many other pages) as Butia odorata. I wasn't sure where the best place to report this was, so I've gone with reporting it on Commons and posting this notification here. -sche (talk) 20:19, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

A possibly relevant comment from 2018: Talk:Butia capitata § This article is actually about another species. Note, though, that File:Butia capitata Madrid.jpg was not used on page Butia capitata, but File:Butia capitata, Tresco.JPG – which the commenter replaced with the current image.  ​‑‑Lambiam 05:31, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

May 25

The spherical cow of stadiums

If a point is x decibels cause 1,000 randomly distributed mouths in radius r then how loud is 10r (10⁵ mouths)? What if it's 3D (10⁶ mouths)? What if the inner ⅓r & 3⅓r respectively have no mouths? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:21, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

First, note that a reading of $x$ decibels is equal to a sound pressure of $p_{0}10^{x/20}$ pascals or a sound intensity of $I_{0}10^{x/10}$ watts per square meter. I'll call these $p_{x}$ and $I_{x}$ for short.

Second, note that standard wave laws mean that the sound intensity given a spherical source will be

$I(r)={\frac {P}{4\pi r^{2}}}$

so multiplying the distance by $10$ gives an intensity $1/100$ the original intensity for a single mouth. Sound pressure is proportional to the square root of sound intensity and thus to $1/r$.

However, we're considering a sphere with the same density, so $100$ times as many mouths. To combine different sound sources, we assume the different mouths are not coordinated enough in their frequency and phase to give strongly constructive or destructive interference, in which case the intensity will be additive and the pressure will be square-root-of-summed-square. (This relates to the additivity of variance in the central limit theorem.) This means that with a constant density of mouths on the surface of a sphere, we multiply the intensity at the reader by $r^{2}$, and get a constant that does not depend on the radius; this will carry back to the decibel reading, which will continue to be $x$.

For the case where the mouths are evenly distributed in space, one can consider it as an integral/sum of spherical shells, and will get a result proportional to $r$ for intensity, ${\sqrt {r}}$ for pressure, and a reading of $x+10\,\log _{10}(r_{2}/r_{1})$. Sesquilinear (talk) 18:45, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

May 29

Trying to understand the guy who wrote the deleted article…

Hello, I tried to ask him but fails to get an answer. Although it doesn’t seems important does, someone understand his logic here in this section ?

He talks about the equation should have the form RSA260^4+18*RSA260^2+1 but then use ((2 (RSA260^2 - 1^2 ))^2 + 1 (RSA260^2 - 1^2)^2 + 5 (((2 1 RSA260)^2)))/(5) 2A01:E0A:ACF:90B0:0:0:A03F:E788 (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

The article was deleted for a reason... byhill (talk) 23:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Yep. And it was mainly WP:OR, not because it was that much wrong.

What he did works for finding remainders equal to 5, I need to understand how to use it for other remainders. 2A01:E0A:ACF:90B0:0:0:A03F:E788 (talk) 08:40, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps this will help: User:Endo999 § Adolf Kunerth's 1878 Modular Square Root Algorithm.  ​‑‑Lambiam 08:49, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'll push back on the claim "not because it was that much wrong". Before I proposed the article's deletion, I spent a lot of time trying to understand what the article's creator was doing, as it looked promising to what I was trying to do. I can now say with confidence that whatever the article's creator was doing does NOT match up to Kunerth's original paper. You can go through the paper and verify this yourself, even if you can't read German. For one, Kunerth's original paper only works when the moduli is prime. In addition, the article (including the "algorithm") as written was completely nonsensical, and they were making false claims about the algorithm, claims that directly contradict well known facts about the hardness of finding modular square roots and the hardness of integer factorization. While WP:OP was enough of a reason for it to get deleted, I wouldn't have gone to the effort of deleting the article if the mathematics was sound. That is why I proposed its deletion.

Maybe the article's creator is doing some interesting mathematics, but it is not what Kunerth was doing. byhill (talk) 11:43, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Yep. He did his own math, hence WP:OR. But I managed to get most of his equations working. 78.245.7.54 (talk) 16:58, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Yay! Great! byhill (talk) 19:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

The reasons for which the article was proposed for deletion can be found here. The vast majority of the participants in the ensuing discussion agreed that the article should be deleted. The person who closed the discussion and deleted the article was not a participant in the discussion but followed the instructions for closing such discussions.  ​‑‑Lambiam 08:42, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

In the end of the discussion, the reason is WP:OR isn’t Ok. It can work in part for what it claims (non generic algorithm) but it’s not Ok for wikipedia. 78.245.7.54 (talk) 17:02, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

May 19

Virgin Money's offer to buy Northern Rock - in 2007, then in 2011. Why the wait?

When Northern Rock collapsed and was nationalized back in 2007, the government sought a buyer. Virgin Group stepped forward with an offer in October 2007.

The government rejected that offer (and all other offers) at that point, and none of the suitors for the collapsed bank were offering to cover all of the bank's liabilities, which was the government's hope and goal.

Now, four years later, On 17 November 2011 the UK Government announced the sale of Northern Rock to... Virgin Money (part of the aforementioned Virgin Group) for £747 million. The deal went through.

My question is, did the U.K. government gain anything from the four year delay? If the best deal that could be obtained, would fail to cover all of Northern Rock's liabilities, why wait four years for a deal that had been offered and rejected back in 2007?

Did it take four years of government scrutiny to simply appreciate the inevitable reality of the situation? Or is there a different explanation?

@DOR (HK):, you're our resident economist; do you have any thoughts? Also @John M Baker: - you're our resident corporate lawyer. I know this isn't really a legal question; but I wonder if your corporate expertise can shed any light on this sort of situation. Others feel free to add their $0.02, of course. EDIT: Pinging also @John Z: and @Dragons flight: as you two have answered banking-related questions from me in the past. I'd love to hear your thoughts and insights on this. Eliyohub (talk) 12:36, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I can’t say that I am too familiar with the Northern Rock transaction, but obviously the situation in 2011 was very different from that in 2007, and there is nothing inherently surprising in the government making a different decision. The government always planned to sell Northern Rock at some point. It apparently believed in 2007 that temporary nationalization, with perceived governmental support, would be less costly than a sale to a third party. John M Baker (talk) 14:19, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

As well as the economic situation being very different, it was two different governments (one Labour, one mostly Conservative) with different views on the merits of nationalisation and privatisation.

PS: WP:ENGVAR would suggest we should be offering our two penn'orth rather than $0.02 ;) AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 15:03, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

If the ‘’best’’ deal was the one offered in 2007, AND WE KNEW IT AT THE TIME, then we can draw conclusions about what might be gained by waiting. What we knew at the time was (a) a buyer was needed; (b) said buyer would ideally cover all of the banks STILL UNKNOWN liabilities; and (c) said buyer would be politically, legally, morally, etc, etc, acceptable. Based on what we know today, there is very little to gain (in the Wikipedia milieu) by speculating as to why a decision was made later, rather than earlier. DOR (ex-HK) (talk)

Two ministers in 1964

In Wilson, Harold. "William Ewart Gladstone". A Prime Minister on Prime Ministers. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson and Michael Joseph. p. 110. ISBN 0-718-11625-9. we read "When the Labour Government was formed in 1964 , two new ministers met outside the Cabinet room, exchanged jobs, and came back to tell the Prime Minister, who told them to go to the departments to which they had been allocated. Within a week both were saying how glad they were to be where they had been sent." Who were those two ministers? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 20:17, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Possibly Richard Crossman who had been Shadow Education Secretary but was given the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, and Michael Stewart who had shadowed housing but was given the education portfolio. See Constitutional Practice: The Foundations of British Government (p. 181). A copy of Crossman's Diaries of a Cabinet Minister might shed more light. Alansplodge (talk) 17:25, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

I think you've got it. "In 1964 Wilson sent Crossman to Housing and Local Government and Stewart to Education. They had held the reverse portfolios in opposition and asked Wilson to give them their old responsibilities back. He refused." [3] --Antiquary (talk) 19:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

@Alansplodge: and @Antiquary: Thank you both, I had Crossman in the back of my mind when I read it. Stewart is rather a forgotten figure nowadays. DuncanHill (talk) 20:53, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

May 21

Ralph Adams Cram

According to Blair, David (2002). Gothic Short Stories. Ware: Wordsworth Editions. p. 242. ISBN 1-84022-425-8. in 1919 Ralph Adams Cram "wrote a preface to a book devoted to claiming that the Great War had been predicted in the 'automatic writings' of mediums". I would be grateful to know what that book was. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 00:09, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

@DuncanHill: The Hill of Vision by Frederick Bligh Bond. Zacwill (talk) 00:35, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 09:45, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

If only Bligh Bond had published The Gate of Remembrance saying where he was going to dig and why, before he started excavating, it would have been so much more convincing. MinorProphet (talk) 15:59, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

If Arabs ran the Barbary slave trade, is the Barbary slave trade an Arab slave trade?

If Maghrebi Arabs were involved in the Barbary slave trade, would the Barbary slave trade be part of the broader Arab slave trade. 2A0A:EF40:13B6:7201:982F:AB47:AFFC:9E7 (talk) 19:49, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

• That would depend on what the sources say. My understanding is that the Barbary slave trade involved maritime routes, where capture occurred within a day's march of the coastline in the Mediterranean or the Atlantic. Those captured being principally Christians. Those involved in this trade were not only Arabs, but people of many ethnicities including Berbers, Turks Italians, Dutch, English, Albanians and Greeks, all nominally serving the Ottomans. The Arab slave trade usually refers to the enslaving of subsaharan people, and trafficking them either over long distances by land or through the Indian ocean. However, there are many books on these topics, and it would be necessary to read several of them and decide how fair they consider the two phenomena to be separate.Boynamedsue (talk) 22:09, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Home Secretaries and Royal births

According to Jenkins, Roy (1999). "Sir John Simon". The Chancellors. London: Papermac. ISBN 0333730585. "When the present Duke of Kent was born in 1935 he was one of the last Home Secretaries to attend a royal accouchement". Now, Edward was the son of a younger son of the monarch at the time. I would like to know 1) what level of closeness to the monarch was regarded as needing a Home Secretary in attendance (eg, only direct descendants? grand-children but not great-grandchildren? etc), and 2) who WAS the last Home Secretary to attend such an event? Also, were there any occasions when an alternative minister performed the duty?Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 21:23, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

If you trust some gal named Marilyn it was a government minister(s) after the Warming Pan Baby up to Edward VIII when it became Home Secretary, the last Simon for Princess Alexandra. fiveby(zero) 03:31, 22 May 2025 (UTC) Some guy named Charlie confirms. fiveby(zero) 03:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

@Fiveby: Thanks, I found the probably more reliable London Gazette had this to say:

From 1894, home secretaries were required to attend royal births for reasons of verification – to ensure that the baby and potential heir to the throne was a descendent of the monarch, and not an imposter. Previous to this, the royal birth room would have been even more crowded with privy councillors and ministers (along with medical practitioners and ladies-in-waiting, among others).

As for the Warming Pan baby:

This Day between Nine and Ten in the morning the QUEEN was safely delivered of a PRINCE at St James’s, his Majesty, the Queen Dowager, most of the Lords of the Privy Council, and Divers Ladies of Quality being present

For the future Edward VIII

ON Saturday, the 23rd instant, at ten o'clock P.M., Her Royal Highness The Duchess of York was safely delivered of a Prince. Their Royal Highnesses The Princess of Wales, The Duchess of Teck, and The Duke of York were present. Mr. Secretary Asquith was also present

And the last Home Secretary was Simon, for Princess Alexandra. DuncanHill (talk) 12:07, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

May 22

Seeking 29 April, 1993 edition of Jakarta Post

Anyone knows where I could find this edition? This is a source cited in Adam Schwarz's A Nation in Waiting: Indonesia in the 1990s. — 王桁霽 (talk) 06:51, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Can you access any of these libraries? AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 09:57, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

@王桁霽: The best place to try is the Resource Exchange. DuncanHill (talk) 10:11, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=9780813388816

https://www.amazon.com/Nation-Waiting-Indonesia-1990s/dp/0813388813 Stanleykswong (talk) 11:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

sanitation

history of sanitation 82.4.170.5 (talk) 14:02, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

history of sanitation. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 14:12, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

I think that's the first occasion in my 20+ years at the Ref Desks where the answer is identical to the question. This is a model of perfection we should all aspire to. Well done, AlmostReadytoFly.-- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:07, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

May 23

Looking for a specific Bible . . .

I have seen some people with the Quran, and they would have a digital copy of the Quran, and basically, they can see the Quranic Arabic version and translated version at the same time. I also like how they look into Tafsir too. I want something like this for the Bible. Something that will show the original language and translated language side by side, even though I can't read the dead languages, but a recitation of the biblical text would be nice even if I don't understand a word, also accompanied with scholarly exegesis just so I know what the piece of old text means. Yrotarobal (talk) 21:51, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Good luck finding an official original language Bible. But I googled "bible in hebrew with english translation", as an example, and found various things, typically called "Interlinear Bible". Maybe one or more of those items could help. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:05, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether or not its publications have parallel text as you desire, but you might be interested in the ongoing work of the Original Bible Project. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 00:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks guys. I went searching for "Interlinear Bible" and found it. Cool. Exactly what I wanted. Reading the English translation feels like I am reading backwards. The translation helps though. I like the original text and the transliteration, but I can't make use of the transliteration because I still can't pronounce it. What does it sound like? Is there an audio recording somewhere of the Bible and the Christian New Testament books? How do I read the Hebrew abjad and Koine Greek alphabet? Do I just use the modern Hebrew abjad to pronounce the biblical Hebrew words, like how Chinese people use the modern pronunciation to pronounce Classical Chinese texts because the Chinese logograms themselves don't preserve sound that well? And what about the medieval Latin version of the Bible? Say, why are Christians less tied to the original languages? I have taken a look at Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and Chinese people, and the peoples all seem to have direct access to the original writing and modern translation. But for Western European Christians, the original writing of Koine Greek gets replaced by Latin, which gets replaced by regional vernaculars? What about Greek Christians? Do the modern Greeks read the Bible's New Testament in the older Greek and modern Greek side by side? And in the New Testament, there are references to Greek gods like Hades, Zeus and Hermes. Is this reflective of ancient and modern Greek society, merging the Greek cosmology of the world with the Hebrew cosmology of the world? Yrotarobal (talk) 13:48, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

See for some information Biblical Hebrew § Phonology. This is a reconstruction; also, there was both synchronic variation (dialects) and diachronic variation (through evolution of the language and its pronunciation). People reciting from the Tanakh will generally use the Modern Hebrew phonology, or if they are Yiddish speakers be influenced by the very different Yiddish phonology, but if they are historically minded they may make an effort to approximate the Tiberian Hebrew pronunciation.  ​‑‑Lambiam 21:22, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Now, I need to find an audio recording of reciting from the Tanakh so then I can follow along as I read. Yrotarobal (talk) 22:16, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

The Bible was originally translated into Latin (the Latin Vulgate) to make it accessible to those Christians who did not speak Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic. The Jews in Egypt had a translation of the Hebrew Bible called the Septuagint in the third century BC. Translations are utilized so those not familiar with the original languages can have access to the Bible.

I am learning Greek since I would like to read the New Testament in its original language and I own an interlinear Bible that has Greek on side and English on the other.

The practice of translating the Bible into a language the common people are familiar with is normal. For example, Adoniram Judson a missionary to Buurma translated the Bible into the language of the people of Buurman. And Reformer Martin Luther translated the Bible into German so that the German people might have access the Scriptures.

Anyway, I hope that was helpful. 2600:1007:B002:6F08:4070:E62D:E59D:F64C (talk) 18:54, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

May 26

Lloyd George quotations

I am looking for good sources for a couple of quotations used in our article David Lloyd George. They are: 1) in 1880 "Is it not high time that Wales should [have] the powers to manage its own affairs", and 2) in 1890, "Parliament is so overweighted that it cannot possibly devote the time and trouble necessary to legislate for the peculiar and domestic retirement of each and every separate province of Britain". Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 13:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

The second quote should be "domestic requirements", not "domestic retirement", I think, and I found it on page 87 in Life of David Lloyd George by Herbert du Parcq, Baron du Parcq, Caxton, 1912. ---Sluzzelin talk 15:00, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

The version in Parcq has a few differences: "Taking the arguments in favour of Irish Home Rule, the first is the contention that the Imperial Parliament is so overweighted with the concerns of a large empire that it cannot possibly devote the time and trouble necessary to legislate for the peculiar and domestic requirements of each and every separate province." —Simon Harley (Talk). 15:06, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

@Sluzzelin:, @Simon Harley: Thank you, "requirements" is clearly correct, I've used du Parcq for the 1890 quotation. DuncanHill (talk) 15:19, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Both quotes were added in 2022, and the first quote added to Welsh devolution two days later. The National Library of Wales blog post cited as a source does not include the quote, funnily enough. —Simon Harley (Talk). 15:42, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

The first quote is actually by T. E. Ellis. See here. Zacwill (talk) 19:45, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

So not Lloyd George and not from 1880. That editor really outdid themselves that day. Nice find, Zacwill. Annoyingly the British Newspaper Archive doesn't have the South Wales Daily News for the first six months of 1886 to double check. —Simon Harley (Talk). 19:55, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Neither does the National Library of Wales. DuncanHill (talk) 19:59, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Robert Williams (archdeacon of Carmarthen)

Would I be right in thinking that Robert Williams (archdeacon of Carmarthen) is the same Robert Williams mentioned in du Parcq, Herbert (1912). "III (1877-1884)". Life of David Lloyd George. Vol. I. London: Caxton Publishing Company, Limited. p. 32. Robert Williams, the pupil teacher who was Mr. Lloyd George's contemporary, is now Canon Williams, Residential Canon at St. David's and a leading light of the Church Defence Association? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

I think the answer is no: it looks like the two Robert Williamses appear together at the top of this page of Oxford alumni. The Llanystumdwy Williams studied theology, the future archdeacon studied history (that puzzle piece is confirmed in Who's Who 1920). If this is the same Robert Williams of Llanystumdwy, he must have been about 17 (to Lloyd George's 14) when he was recorded as off sick as du Parcq's book says.  Card Zero  (talk) 21:01, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Looking in Who's Who I found the Canon Residentiary of St David's under Camber-Williams, Rev. Robert, 1860-1924. Both he and the Venerable Robert, 1863-1938, were examining chaplains to the Bishop of St David's. DuncanHill (talk) 21:25, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

And I find in Spender, Harold (1920). "I: Childhood". The Prime Minister. London: Hodder and Stoughton. p. 16. mention of "two pupil-teachers who were a little older than the boys themselves. Both of these teachers were destined for the Church; one of them became a rector and another became a Canon of St. David's", Spender names them in a footnote as "The Rev. Owen Owens and Canon Camber-Williams of St. David's". DuncanHill (talk) 22:15, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

"Beizadea Ghica-Vodă"

Nicolae Grigorescu, Potretul Beizadelei Ghica-Vodă

I just uploaded this, and I'm hoping to be more confident on the identification of the person portrayed. The Museum of Art Collections in Bucharest identifies it as Potretul Beizadelei Ghica-Vodă, that is "Portrait of Beizadea (Prince) Ghica-Vodă". I can't neatly attach the name "Ghica-Vodă" to one member of the Ghica family, but it looks to me like Dimitrie Ghica, who would certainly have been prominent enough in the relevant period (he served as prime minister and in various other offices), and it looks like other pictures I've seen of him. Still, that's a bit weak for identification, especially because family members often resemble one another. What I'd really like to pin down is who was known as "Ghica-Vodă", which would probably clinch it. - Jmabel | Talk 20:13, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

@Jmabel: It looks like "Ghica-Voda" is a branch of the Ghica family. There is a list here which may be of use. DuncanHill (talk) 20:28, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

May 27

Ideological bias on Wikipedia

I cannot find sources saying that Wikipedia supports materialism, secularism, atheism, agnosticism, and liberal Christianity. Remember: I'm not saying that supporting them would be bad, just that it is a "bias", so will have to be included in the article. tgeorgescu (talk) 14:30, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Because everyone can change the content, minimizing bias is inevitable, so open forums tend to be neutral. Stanleykswong (talk) 19:36, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

No they'd be a popularity contest of a systemic-biased sample of humans. Also truth is more important than a non-systemic biased sample of humans, a non-systemic biased sample of all humans once would've said A380s can't be invented and no sea'll ever be safe from pirates what are they wrong about now? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:29, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, it is true that many experts have said that the A380 could not be invented, for many reasons.  But the A380 was indeed invented. Both systematic and non-systemic bias can occur in any system, but if the system is open enough, it will correct itself. That's the beauty of open systems. Stanleykswong (talk) 07:20, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

How many hundreds of thousands of years since the start of behaviorally modern humans (or even longer since the first time majority thought it was flat) did it take to correct "Earth is flat"? Earth could even really be flat & this is just a brain in a vat & if true there's no grand deterministic eschatological reason it'll ever be corrected and no such reason it won't. I don't believe that but if true it'd merely be a common metaphysics belief among the sims which will never have good evidence for or against. An asteroid could kill so many the majority will think Earth is flat after enough generations & another catastrophe (i.e. inbreeding extinction) could make that the final and most "advanced" position ever. Not everything works like math & physical science even without tech regressing i.e. there's no right answer to if women or men are clearly sexier or neither are or about equally sexy & at the same time only one right answer & everyone disagrees (and is thankful everyone disagrees if they happen to be straight) & there might never be over 50% agreement on one of those options. Majority can be wrong for extremely long & simultaneously right on many things and the minority is pulling their hair out thinking what the hell is wrong with you & they may or may not ever be the majority & questions like if "New Amsterdam" would be better with its prostitution laws or Old Amsterdam's or if you'd need an alternate timeline viewer to be sure are subjective & personal preference. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:25, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, it took hundreds of thousands of years for people to figure out that the Earth isn't flat.  The reasons are: first, people do not think it is important; second, people do not have enough knowledge to initiate and conduct discussions; third, there is no open forum for people to share knowledge, raise doubts and ask questions.

Why were ancient Greek philosophers among the first to discover that the Earth wasn't flat?  Why not Asians? The reason is that ancient Greek philosophers were allowed to think and discuss openly, while ancient Asian philosophers did not have this kind of environment.

I am not saying that open systems are perfect systems.  I'm just saying that open systems have a better chance of minimizing bias. Stanleykswong (talk) 19:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

And who knows maybe eating meat will be seen as barbaric by most humans in the future or it'll be seen like today or the right of conquest will be more supported or an all vs. one war will literally regime change anyone who dares change the holy borders of 1398 BBY or living on planets will be a niche subculture or mandatory after the mardrive test catastrophe or everyone's tatooed if they want to not be a weirdo like some tribes or not if no non-Japanese survived the asteroid or everyone has guns cause hysteresis from the zombie war or guns are hunted down and destroyed by the superintelligent AI droids with only an average of 3 existing worldwide at any given time who's right? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Throughout history, whether to eat meat has been a matter of affordability and personal choice. There is no right or wrong.  

Thinking that people are barbaric when they eat meat is just a personal opinion.  As long as people who think this way do not affect others, they should be allowed to think this way.

Of course, the above comments are based on the premise of an open society. Under a dictatorship, people eating meat or other things the dictator doesn't like may be seen as illegal, barbaric, enemies of the people, or whatever term the dictator wants to use. Stanleykswong (talk) 19:16, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Does this also apply to eating human meat? If not, why is the meat of humans taboo and that of other animals not? Could it be that this reflects a bias?  ​‑‑Lambiam 20:24, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

It is taboo from the perspective of empathy, culture, and lesion.

I think this discussion might make more sense if the question was "Why are cat and dog meat taboo, but pork and beef are not?" Stanleykswong (talk) 21:24, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Also majorities can change fairly quickly. Till the 1980s or 90s you could be forced to smoke secondhand on major U.S. airlines & subway trains which I see as barbaric cause I was born just too late to remember & in 2011 even smoking on outdoor parts of my city's subways, parks & beaches was banned never would've expected that to happen till it did. I was contemporaries of generations who thought smoking was as eternal as English Channel pirates seemed in 1630 till it wasn't (the English Channel & Mediterranean & wider parts of the Thames were hotbeds of piracy till as late as the 1830s for the Med). Maybe soon it'll be banned from sidewalks! Also I never would've predicted so much open sidewalk cannabis smoking & legal shops (till 2010s NYPD would bust smokers hiding inside with even 1 joint cause they smelled) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:06, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The "majority" cannot change quickly.  Building public consensus takes a long time.

In the 1940s, scientists began to recognize the link between smoking and lung cancer.  Scientific studies in the 1940s and 1950s demonstrated this connection.

However, it wasn’t until the 1990s that smoking was banned in public places, including airlines and subways.  It took half a century for public consensus to emerge. Stanleykswong (talk) 19:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

That was lightning speed compared to how long it took "Earth is round" to poll 50.0000001% starting from Caveman Og or Eratosthenes. They saw the same lunar eclipses as everyone else. Polling isn't truth. Sometimes it makes accurate (thus very hard to profit from) prediction markets like NFL spreads, sometimes it makes irrational bubbles that don't recover for 25 years. Didn't the 40s studies have little effect cause they were associated with Nazis even a broken clock right twice a day? James I said smoking was harmefull to braine, dangerous to Lung & also feared witches. Anyway cyclamate began to be suspected of causing health problems in the late 1960s particularly after 1969 studies linked it to rat bladder cancer. Based on these findings USA FDA banned it 1969. The ozone hole was discovered '85 (published 5/16/85) Montreal Protocol signed 9/16/87 Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:07, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

My point is that there is no comparison between the two things.  

Whether the Earth is round or not does not matter to most people, especially those who do not make a living from fishing or maritime transport. I was not surprised when my American colleagues told me earlier that some Americans still believe the Earth is flat. Even though scientific evidence has proven that the Earth is a sphere and orbits the Sun, they still have the right to believe that our planet is flat and that the Sun orbits the Earth.  How they perceive reality does not affect anyone else, so they are completely free to perceive it that way.

However, the act of smoking does affect other people, and therefore, smokers should not be given the right to smoke in public places.  The harm of smoking affects everyone, but as long as it does not cause harm to others, it is also a personal choice for smokers to smoke in their own place. Stanleykswong (talk) 06:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes & that's the current popularity contest winner. Some time in the next billion years (Earth could be humanoid-habitable for that long even without orbit raising or other tech, even a generation from now might be unpredictable from tech singularity) that might be seen as self-harm & they'll be compulsorily cured of their addiction in mental hospitals or detox centers with e-cigs or whatever. But who knows the fickle popularity contest might even be free (tax-funded) Futurama-style suicide booths with usually no protestors blocking the door so they surely wouldn't care if only those who want to breathe smoke get harmed. Or future popularity contests on self-harm might be some somewhere between those extremes or beyond them (more extreme). You think that's absolute truth cause what part of the popularity contest you personally remember, some 22nd centuryites might not remember before smokers were involuntarily committed to mental hospitals for self-harm or before suicide booths became common cause death by old age became optional (only if you want (they'd try Futurama booths before birth bans or killing more than a small % of the most evil)) & there's no way for 2025 people to know where on that spectrum it'll be cause tech will change fast in the future. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't think anything this extreme will happen in the future, at least in the civilized society we live in. In fact, if you look back over the past few thousand years of history, society has become more and more open, and personal opinions and behaviors, as long as they do not harm the interests of others, are increasingly respected. Since governments are elected by citizens, officials need to listen to the voters and the absolute power of the government is being limited.

Of course, in other parts of the world, there are countries that are less civilized. Citizens do not have the right to elect their government. In those less civilized countries, dictators can do whatever they want without any constraints from the people. Stanleykswong (talk) 19:06, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

The trend is also more and more anti-smoking one of the trends has to end first in the smoking sphere. Or most people getting a twentysomething body combined with Kessler syndrome could lead to suicide booths & almost no one caring if you smoke crack in private with your UBI. You may think it's un-libertarian or whatever to ban all computers above 1 petaflop but that's probably the good timeline of the 21st century, in Dune the singularity was so bad most survivors agreed thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:55, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

E.g., I have found https://www.worldreligionnews.com/wikipedia/wikipedia-and-religion-uncovering-the-dynamics-of-reliable-sources-and-digital-bias/ . But that isn't a good source for the article. tgeorgescu (talk) 14:36, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

And https://www.worldreligionnews.com/wikipedia/wikipedia-bias-on-religion-creationism-vs-science-how-wikipedia-assumed-the-role-of-arbiter-of-faith/ is outright delusional. tgeorgescu (talk) 14:52, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

@Tgeorgescu Do you have a question? If you are looking to improve said article (with reliable sources, not just your opinion) the place to do so is on that article's talk page. We are not here to find sources that support your opinion. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:24, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Flat earthers may say that Wikipedia is biased because it does not maintain an equilibrium between the two sides in this issue. But, actually, Wikipedia's stance represents its Neutral point of view policy. Two sides in a debate should not necessarily always be presented as being in equilibrium. The complaint more likely reveals a bias of the complainant.  ​‑‑Lambiam 20:51, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

dual prosecution not pursued (US)

How common is a situation where someone commits a crime and gets arrested, the local district attorney or state AG is ready to prosecute, but the US DOJ also prosecutes the person so the state level ones don't bother? Asking because US presidential pardons are currently operating as a chaos monkey in the criminal justice system.[4][5] So I'm wondering whether additional failover engineering at the state level in the early phases might have helped, and whether there is any known movement towards that now. Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:AAE9:1B5:9F2C:B646 (talk) 21:47, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't know the direct answer to your question. One thing to keep in mind, though, is that some states have stronger protections against double jeopardy than the federal government does. The US Supreme Court has allowed federal prosecutions of the same conduct after state acquittals, which to me seems in direct contradiction to the plain language of the Double Jeopardy Clause, but their opinion counts and mine doesn't. But I think California, for example, does not allow state prosecutions of the same conduct after a federal acquittal. I could be wrong about that; I don't see it specifically in the article. --Trovatore (talk) 22:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

I hadn't thought about acquittals though I'll take your word about them. I was asking more about federal convictions where the POTUS pardons the person afterwards, but the rest of us would be better off if the person stayed in jail. Sometimes someone is convicted on both federal and state charges, so in case of a federal pardon, they are still not out of the woods. I'm wondering how often there is a federal prosecution but no state prosecution, because while state charges would probably have also stuck, the state prosecutors were satisfied leaving it to the feds. 2601:644:8581:75B0:AAE9:1B5:9F2C:B646 (talk) 22:33, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

So I talked about acquittals because they're sort of the clearest case, but double jeopardy is about more than just acquitted conduct or acquitted alleged conduct. It's also about conduct that results in a previous conviction. See peremptory plea for a discussion of autrefois acquit and autrefois convict; while they're not precisely the same thing, I generally put them in the same conceptual box.

If you're convicted and pardoned at the federal level, you definitely can't be tried again on the same facts at the federal level; that would be clear double jeopardy, in spite of the fact that you were never acquitted. The Double Jeopardy Clause doesn't say anything about the claims of separate jurisdictions; it just says "twice put in jeopardy" though it does continue "of life or limb" which is obviously a minority of cases. In any case I would expect that states that don't permit prosecution after a federal acquittal would also not permit it after a federal conviction. --Trovatore (talk) 23:00, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Again I'm not really concerned with the question of double jeopardy. This is about the situation where a really bad person gets pardoned from federal prison due to, let's say, POTUS-level misjudgment. The idea is to prevent that by also having state charges. It's quite common for someone to be locked up on state and federal charges simultaneously so I presume that is legally legit. If someone is only there on federal charges, it's for one of two reasons: 1) there weren't usable state statutes that applied to that specific crime, or 2) there were state charges available, but the state prosecutors didn't bother because the feds were already taking care of it. So I'm wondering how often it is #2.

I'm not too worried about (and not supportive of) the idea of a state re-prosecuting someone after they get federally pardoned. I'm imagining instead that there is, say, a bank robbery that is both a state and federal crime, where the state prosecutors might in the past have said "let's not spend state resources charging this guy, because the feds are already nailing him anyway". They might now instead want to say "even post-conviction, federal charges are unreliable because of unpredictable pardons, so we better still prosecute at the state level just in case". This is in the "deciding what to do with the suspect" phase of the case, before any trials or convictions have actually happened. 2601:644:8581:75B0:AAE9:1B5:9F2C:B646 (talk) 00:19, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Double jeopardy is kind of a key question here; you really can't avoid it. You say It's quite common for someone to be locked up on state and federal charges simultaneously so I presume that is legally legit., but this is a judge-made exception to the double-jeopardy rule, called "dual jurisdiction" or "dual sovereignty". I think it was created in response to Southern states protecting perpetrators of racial violence by giving them softball trials. Not all states followed suit in the reverse direction. This is essential to the question that you asked, whether you "want" to talk about it or not. --Trovatore (talk) 00:27, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Typically, when the feds wanted a way around double jeopardy after dubious acquittals in the white supremacist South, the key was to use a very different charge. "OK, you've been acquitted of killing him, but we can still go after you for violating his civil rights." - Jmabel | Talk 01:46, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

No, that in itself, in my understanding, doesn't get you around double jeopardy. Once someone has been tried once (a complete trial including a result and all appeals) for a given set of facts, you can't try them again in the same jurisdiction on the same facts, even if you come up with a different theory as to why it was illegal. They were relying on the "dual sovereignty" exception. --Trovatore (talk) 17:19, 28 May 2025 (UTC) I think the reason for the "civil rights" language is that the federal government doesn't usually have jurisdiction over one-on-one crime like murder. They needed something that would give them jurisdiction, so they used the violation of the rights guaranteed by the federal constitution. This restriction has admittedly gotten thinner and thinner over the years; for Luigi Mangione they're relying on the fact that he (allegedly) crossed state lines to do the dastardly deed, which seems a bit weak to me. --Trovatore (talk) 01:31, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

May 28

Inverted Union Jack

Note the colours on the Union Jack flying over the Canadian militia -- blue cross on red ground.

What is the meaning of the colour inverted Union Jack in this depiction of the Battle of Ridgeway? 91.221.58.29 (talk) 11:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

It could be unintentional? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:27, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Right, it's chromolithograph, so they may have simply mixed up which region of the flag belonged on which color plate. --Amble (talk) 17:31, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

That can't be the case, or the British-Canadian forces in the battle would also have blue, not the correct red, jackets of the 13th Battalion from Hamilton (the Queen's Own Rifles of Toronto, also involved, had dark green uniforms).

Possibly this is not the Union Flag (aka "Jack"), but the Colours of one of those units at that date. (It resembles a Russian naval jack, presumably coincidentally.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 20:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

found an inconclusive reddit discussion of a substantially similar flag seen flown from a ship in Canaletto's "A View of Greenwich from the River", c. 1750. (at right here: https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/canaletto-a-view-of-greenwich-from-the-river-l01926)

discussions on reddit tend toward the conclusion that it was an accurate depiction of an irregular version of the union jack, based on vague early definitions of the flag. i don't feel entirely convinced. 91.194.221.225 (talk) 11:13, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

A printer's error seems the most likely by far, perhaps after a liquid lunch. Alansplodge (talk) 12:27, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I was suggesting an error when preparing the plates, not an error when applying the colored ink for printing. --Amble (talk) 17:05, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Ah, I see. But we'll probably never know. Alansplodge (talk) 17:07, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

And what's with 'IRA' on the Fenian (so-called) flag? —Fortuna, imperatrix 16:49, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

The raiders apparently referred to themselves as the "Irish Republican Army". See e.g. here and here. Zacwill (talk) 17:14, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

The uniforms of the Fenians are wrong too. Perhaps the artist wasn't actually there and made some things up? DuncanHill (talk) 19:49, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

House numbers

Many (most) streets have houses numbered with odds on one side and evens of the other, rather than simply consecutively. Why is this? When did this convention originate? Who gets to decide which side is numbered with evens and are there any guiding principles for this choice? Thanks. 2A00:23C7:533:3C01:E5C6:F19A:E5A4:6577 (talk) 18:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

We have an article about House numbering, which may go some way to answering your questions. DuncanHill (talk) 19:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

They don't have to renumber every time the street gets longer. In NYC they try to make the north+east sides odd & south+west sides even. North+east are the nominal trump cards in western culture (map up, orientation of churches, ad orientum, T-O map (orient means east), east longitudes are positive) so house number 1 (or [lowest block]-01 if Queens) is on the "right side of the father" since they don't start at zero like programmers. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh I didn't know. I will have a look. Thank you.

If, say, the street was initially built with 100 houses and one side was 1–50, the other side could be numbered either 51–100 or 100–51; the former would put 51 opposite 1 and 100 opposite 50, the latter would mean 51 was across the street from 50, but 100 was opposite 1: both could be confusing, although both schemes are sometimes used, particularly in shorter 'closes' which cannot be extended.

But what if the street was later lengthened? Both the arrangements above would force a discontinuity; 50 would be followed by 101 and 51/100 by some rather higher number. A yet later extension would create yet another discontinuity: the road I myself currently live in was built in several such stages as my town grew. To avoid such discontinuities, each new section would have to be given a different name, with numbers re-commencing from 1.

If instead numbers are odd on one side and even on the other (as in my road), the initial build will have 99 and 100 opposite each other at the furthest end, and newer houses can simply extend the scheme indefinitely, with n and n+1 always roughly opposite. {The poster formerly known as 87.781.230.195} — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.154.147 (talk) 20:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

From a previous discussion I recall that, in the UK, house numbers typically start at 1 for each unique street name. You geolocate to the UK so that's probably what you're most asking about, but as a matter of possible interest, it's quite different in most parts of the United States. Often you will have some fixed increment, typically 100, per "block", even though there aren't 100 houses in a block, so that it's easy to guess how many cross-streets you need to pass before you find the address you want. Also there's no guarantee that the numbers start with a low value like 100; it's quite common to have streets with only 4-digit house numbers, or even only 5-digit numbers in more urban areas. --Trovatore (talk) 04:40, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Then you have Manhattan where a non-renamed avenue starts at 11 Wadsworth Avenue ("11.5th Avenue") where it'd be about 17311 if it was 100 per block (21311 if street numbering started at the southernmost street instead of the southernmost part of the 1811 countryside) & Queens where non-renamed avenues+streets start at 147-05 2nd Avenue, 83-07 165th Avenue & 75-58 271st Street. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:07, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

In some US cities there are "interrupted streets" (consisting of non-contiguous segments) but with the numbering system proceeding as if the missing parts are filled with numbered ghost buildings. For example, the lowest odd number following 435 Tasso St in Palo Alto, CA, is 1319 Tasso St; these addresses are separated by eight city blocks without Tasso Street.^[6] For parallel streets these are the 500 through 1200 blocks.  ​‑‑Lambiam 20:18, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

In my street, mentioned above, a run of odd numbers on one side was skipped where instead a school was built as part of that stage of extension (in about 1890, I think; my own house was built as part of a further stage about ten years later). Within the last 20 years this school became redundant, was demolished, and new houses were built on part of the site (the rest becoming a car park) that were able to take up the previously unused numbers in the sequence. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 23:26, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Skipped numbers are really common in Manhattan. They didn't number a city that already existed like Central London but more like the other way around (citied numbers that already existed) and the lots are really skinny if they've never been merged if they have a skyscraper could subsume every odd or even in 20 numbers plus 10 or more on the side streets all merged to 1 lot and it seems owners could keep the coolest seeming of their numbers i.e. 1211, 1221, 1251 and 1271 Avenue of the Americas 107 numbers skipped in 6 blocks of 1197 and 1319 Avenue of the Americas inclusive (everyone calls it 6th Avenue). They often end in 0 like 350 5th Avenue (Empire State Building) you can sort all pre-2021 addresses over 600 feet here. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:03, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

I live in a US city I'm aware. The 1st one's cause 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9 were legally fused into 1 lot (615 West 173rd Street (cause New Yorkers who don't know Wadsworth will know ### Compass Direction ###?)) and the "2 through 20 block" is 4116 Broadway (more famous of a street than Wadsworth, 173 or 174). Also the lowest I could find on Google Maps is 3 Wadsworth on the 615 tax lot but the sign says "615 W.". The others really do start that high cause they had to number the contiguous orange that's hard to do without many streets starting above 1-01. 1st Street starts at 26-01 it's the tip of the bump near the blue islands. 1st Avenue doesn't seem to exist maybe cause there's a few 1 dash number houses on a dead end street north of 2nd Avenue? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:08, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Unlike the system in Western countries where houses are numbered consecutively on the street, in Japan, house numbers are usually not arranged in sequence. Stanleykswong (talk) 19:16, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Is it true they're numbered in chronological order within the block and the blocks are commonly referred to by number (unlike the US where block numbers (the this is the 7,654th block in the city or county kind not the this is the 100 block of Oak Street cause it's between 1st and 2nd) are only on tax maps)? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:26, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Does chronological order mean he first house built will be number 1, etc? HiLo48 (talk) 23:29, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

First building on the block. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:09, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

May 30

General McDougall monument at Paisley Abbey

An 1816 publication,

• William Raphael Eginton (1816), Reference to Some of the Works Executed in Stained Glass, Wikidata Q106612012

has an entry (written as shown): "Paisley Abbey Church,—Mosaic Window, 20 Feet by 8, over General M'Dougall's Monument."

There are no specifically relevant Google hits for general McDougall Paisley Abbey. Who was he, and is the window extant? Does (or did) it commemorate him? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:14, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Haven't found the answer (after half an hour of websearching), but bear in mind that M'Dougall might be rendered as MacDougall, or Macdougall, or McDougall. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 18:07, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

The Abbey's website, more specifically The Abbey Herald (Feb 2024), mentions a "MacDowall memorial, one of the finest monuments in the Abbey" "Kist o’ Whistles or the King of Instruments? — The Organ of Paisley Abbey, 1874 - 2024". No idea whether that's it, however.---Sluzzelin talk 18:16, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

The MacDowall memorial is to William McDowall. He wasn't a general, but his brother Hay MacDowall was - clutching at straws to suggest a connection here though, I couldn't find any evidence of a related monument. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 18:58, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Presumably it wouldn't be Major-General Alexander McDougall. --Amble (talk) 21:06, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

A Google search for Paisley Abbey MacDougall brings up an Ancestry.com record for "Alexander 23rd Chief Dunollie MacDougall" who died at Paisley Abbey in 1801. Presumably this is the same Alexander MacDougall mentioned in Clan MacDougall#18th century and Jacobite risings, but as to whether he was a general, or had a monument at the abbey, that is unclear to me. It could also be one of his ancestors, although I couldn't find any other explicit connection between a MacDougall in the clan and Paisley Abbey. GalacticShoe (talk) 17:41, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

In the First Circle

In the First Circle by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has a character named Gleb Nerzhin who is a mathematician, described in the Wikipedia article as autobiographical, and Solzhenitsyn himself (per his biography article) studied math and physics in university, though he didn't stay in those areas. I haven't read the book. Does anyone know how important this aspect is to Gleb Nerzhin's character as depicted in the novel? I.e. is it prominent enough to warrant including the book in a catalogue[7] of fictional works about mathematics and mathematicians? Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:20DF:3BAF:405C:ADF9 (talk) 20:32, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

He already has a mention in Gleb, where he is described as the "leading character".

A synopsis of the novel is here. Alansplodge (talk) 15:56, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Although Gleb Nerzhin is a mathematician (as is Vladimir Erastovich Chelnov^[8]), mathematics does not play a role in the narrative, so classifying the book as a book "about mathematics" would seem less appropriate.  ​‑‑Lambiam 19:43, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, fair enough. The criterion for the database isn't that the book is about mathematics, but that it features mathematics or mathematicians, presumably in some reasonable amount of depth. If Gleb Nerzhin's profession isn't really important to the novel, then I guess it doesn't count. 2601:644:8581:75B0:EDF:E17D:3DA2:9C87 (talk) 09:36, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

May 31

King Charles III medals in Canada

What medals and honours was Charles wearing during his recent opening of the Canadian parliament, as seen in 2025 royal visit to Canada and this (non-free) image?

Apparently, the one around his neck is as head of the Order of Canada. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:56, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

He usually wears (from left to right as you face him) -

King's Service Order

Queen Elizabeth II Coronation Medal

Queen Elizabeth II Silver Jubilee Medal

Queen Elizabeth II Golden Jubilee Medal

Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal

Queen Elizabeth II Platinum Jubilee Medal

Naval Long Service and Good Conduct Medal (1848) three bars

Canadian Forces' Decoration three bars

New Zealand 1990 Commemoration Medal

New Zealand Armed Forces Award

Nanonic (talk) 11:33, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Agreed; see also List of titles and honours of Charles III#Wear of orders, decorations, and medals but omitting the orders of chivalry. Alansplodge (talk) 16:12, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you; yes, all those ribbons tie up with the images in our articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:54, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

June 1

Beideman Station, Philadelphia

Mabbett & Wiles, Philadelphia, advertising card (1876), obverse, giving a location of "Beideman Station, three miles from Market St. Ferry, Phila, On P.R.R. C.&A. Division".

Where precisely was Beideman Station? What was the PRR's "C&A Division?" Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:27, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Beideman Station was a location in Stockton in Camden County, New Jersey.[9][10] Most likely named after the Beideman family,[11] there is a neighborhood still with the name - Beideman, Camden.

The C&A division maybe refers to the Camden and Amboy Railroad and Transportation Company (which they later took over) Nanonic (talk) 14:49, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

And we have an article on Market Street (Philadelphia) and there used to be a ferry there between Philly and Camden.[12] Nanonic (talk) 14:54, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

A map of 1891 (found on historicaerials.com) shows a stop named "Beideman's Station" at 39°57'32"N 75°04'53"W, on the Camden and Amboy line. Zacwill (talk) 14:59, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Awesome. Thank you, all. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:09, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

(ec)Reviewing occurrences of "Beideman Station" in Newspapers.com (pay site), I don't see anything for 1876, but there are other mentions. Here are a few of them:

• Apr 5, 1875: train from New York, due in Camden, approaching Beideman's Station
• Jun 19, 1880: Beideman's Station, on the Amboy division of the Pennsylvania Railroad
• Feb 5, 1881: Beideman's Station
• Aug 23, 1881: funeral for Eleanor Beideman, wife of Jacob Beideman, at his residence, Beideman Station, New Jersey
• Apr 12, 1884: Beideman's Station, in Stockton Township, Camden County.
• Aug 27, 1884: Beideman's Station, a few miles from Camden.
• Apr 3, 1889: Jacob Beideman, Jersey farmer and fish house proprietor at Beideman's Station, just outside of Camden
• Aug 9, 1889: Beideman's Station, on the outskirts of Camden
• Sep 8, 1895: Mozart Fishing Club, a short walk from Beideman Station on the old Camden and Amboy, now the Pennsylvania, Railroad
• Jan 26, 1899: near Camden — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baseball Bugs (talk • contribs) 15:17, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

May 20

Dog knows dog

I searched hours but didn't find any specific useful information about its origin. I will appreciate any help. Omidinist (talk) 17:42, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't know if it was original, but the earliest use I found, with "dog" in its literal sense, referring to man's best friend, is here, from 2018. The next use is from the same author, less than a year later. The first use I saw with "dog" in the sense of "all men are dogs" is in a comment posted in 2022 on this Facebook video. Then the sense is that of it takes one to know one, with an echo of dog eat dog.  ​‑‑Lambiam 20:36, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you.Omidinist (talk) 21:13, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

May 22

False titles and noun adjuncts

Isn't a false title just an instance of noun adjunct? If so, why can't I find any sources which describe false titles as noun adjuncts other than this answer on Stack Exchange? ―Howard • 🌽³³ 08:44, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Looking at "false title", it strikes me that it's misleading. Saying that "convicted bomber McVeigh" is a "false title" ignores the fact that it's not capitalized, and it's not a title; it's merely descriptive. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:23, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Capitalisation is a null issue in spoken language. Denying that it's a title is the nub of the issue: it operates exactly as if it were a title, whatever the author's intention was. Hence "pseudo-title". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:24, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

"...predominantly found in journalistic writing", per the article. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Yet I hear it all the time on TV and radio news reports, whether from local or international sources. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

And Time magazine used to capitalize them, so that it would include locutions like "Editor William Shawn" or "Movie Star John Wayne". Deor (talk) 23:20, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

or even Football Enthusiast Joseph Sixpack. —Tamfang (talk) 02:18, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

This trope has been highlighted in criticisms of the writing style of Dan Brown, who is inclined to introduce characters with paragraphs beginning something like "Eminent phlebotomist Fred Smith walked down the corridor . . . ." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 13:38, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

None of these answer my question. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 13:39, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

It would be reasonable to describe a false title as a noun adjunct. Anecdotally, I only see words described as noun adjuncts when they modify common nouns, and I can't think of noun adjuncts that modify proper nouns that aren't false titles. A deep dive into this topic is complicated by the level of discourse about false titles, which has been stuck for a long time at the "are they acceptable?" level. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:10, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

These are not titles, they are merely identifiers. The notion that they somehow are titles, sounds like OR, maybe by someone who does not speak English natively. One could argue that the "false titles" article is a POV fork from "noun adjuncts". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:03, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

How could one argue that? ―Howard • 🌽³³ 18:04, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

BB, these are commonly called false titles. You're free to disagree with the experts here, but it'd be better to present it as an unorthodox opinion of yours than as an accepted fact. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Never heard of it until this question came up, and doubt it's in "common" usage. It's merely descriptive. Like terrorist bomber McVeigh as opposed to barber shop owner McVeigh or librarian McVeigh, as a hypothetical. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:58, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

That's clearly the intent. But the absence of "the" makes a difference. "Actor George Wendt" is identical in form to "President Donald Trump" and "Sergeant Joe Bloggs" and "Mayor Quimby" and "Fire Chief Bill Smith". That's why, in this construction, "Actor" has the form of a title, like President, Sergeant, Mayor and Fire Chief. In the way things used to be done, people talked of "the actor George Wendt", which was clearly solely descriptive. But then they dropped the article, and this had the effect of making the meaning technically ambiguous: it could be a title, or it could be merely descriptive. We know that the latter is the case, but from the viewpoint of a grammarian the wording suggests a title. Hence "pseudo-title". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:09, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

In an English compound noun whose first component is a noun, such as alcohol abuse, baby boom and cable car, the main stress is on the first component. The main stress in Dandy Dave is on the second component. Therefore I think we should not classify Dandy in this combination as a noun adjunct.  ​‑‑Lambiam 21:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I believe they're considered appositives and not noun adjuncts because removing "convicted bomber" from "convicted bomber Timothy McVeigh" (i.e. just "Timothy McVeigh") does not change the meaning of the phrase. Nardog (talk) 04:47, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps an example is the usage in the USA when referring to our British Dear Leader as "Prime Minister Starmer", whereas the usual form over here would be "the prime minister, Sir Kier Starmer". Alansplodge (talk) 19:01, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Four languages (medium/learned) by 9th grade in countries

Hello,

which countries have four languages overall (medium and or learned) by 8th grade of school.

Kind regards Sarcelles (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Do you mean that, within the country but perhaps in different regions of it or for pupils of differing family backgrounds, four languages will have been taught (or taught in) in various combinations of two or three (in which case Switzerland and Singapore seem likely examples), or that all pupils are usually taught/taught in a total of four languages?

(For the large majority of the world who, like me, are unfamiliar with the US Age/Grade system, I gather that 9th Grade corresponds to about 14–15 years old.)

{The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 18:32, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

There are several countries with four or more official languages, but then, their distribution is mostly areal, and all languages aren't widely used in education. However, it might still be common for speakers to learn four or so languages with passable fluency, just for general communication in daily life. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

In the Netherlands, alongside the official language Dutch, English, German and French are all mandatory at school. Those are the official languages of the neighbouring countries (if you count the UK as neighbouring; there are ferry connections). Schools may offer additional languages and for some there are official exams; my school offered Latin, Greek and Russian. In the province Fryslân the regional language Frisian may be offered. I think the situation is similar in Belgium, where Dutch, French and German are all official and English is too important to ignore. I'm not sure about Switzerland, but I expect everybody learns German, French, Italian and English. PiusImpavidus (talk) 16:03, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Another reason for Nigel Powers' hatred of the Dutch: language one-upmanship three-upmanship. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:30, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your answers. What about non-European countries? Sarcelles (talk) 16:47, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

May 24

Oxford English Dictionary Third Edition

I had two questions about the OED 3rd edition:

• Is there an estimated time when it will be finished?
• According to the Wikipedia entry, it seems that this edition will never be printed. If it did appear in book form, how big would it be (either in its current state or its estimated completion?). 76.7.193.12 (talk) 02:17, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Nobody knows. As stated above, "We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate." Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:01, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

However, we may observe that (as stated in Oxford English Dictionary) OED3 is expected to be completed by 2037, and to double the size of the dictionary. (Personally, I would expect both estimates to be exceeded, but I should not speculate.) Edit: OED2 in print filled 20 volumes. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 23:22, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

May 25

Ultrarelativistic

If hyper- or ultrarelativistic is the formal or technical term used to describe something that is travelling very close to lightspeed, what would be the opposite of this; what would be the formal or technical term used to describe something that is faster than lightspeed?

If no such term exists in real-life sciences due to the impossibility of the feat, for the sake of let's say, a fictional work; what would a proper term for energy, objects, electromagnetic radiation, etc. that travel faster than light would be constructed like (for example, would it make more sense to borrow from Latin or Greek)? 72.234.12.37 (talk) 16:19, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

One term that's been used is superluminal. See the article Faster-than-light. Deor (talk) 16:30, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

I have heard of that term, but I assumed it was an invention by science-fiction creatives, rather than coined by any scholar, physicist, or scientist of some repute. 72.234.12.37 (talk) 17:12, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

The OED's "earliest evidence" of it is in the writings of Karl Popper in 1959. I too would have guessed it to be earlier, and possibly from a Science Fiction author, but the latter would not make it 'disreputable' – a number of scientifically accepted terms originated in Science Fiction, and of course some SF writers did and do have academic science qualifications and even were/are practicing scientists.

Astronomers were observing apparent faster-than-light motion from as early as 1901, so it would not be surprising if someone had coined the fairly obvious term 'superluminal' well before the 1950s. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 19:27, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

The Historical Dictionary of Science Fiction lists a number of terms used in fiction here. I am surprised at the absence of terms using the prefix trans-, such as transwarp in Star Trek. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 19:54, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

transwarp is a recent coinage and not popular among readers or writers of science fiction or even Star Trek fans who are neither, not least because it is more than usually meaningless, even for television technobabble. Orange Mike | Talk 15:19, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Also wikt:tachyonic 122.56.85.105 (talk) 03:01, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

May 27

Usage guides and "It's me"

Usage guides tell people it is incorrect (not just disliked by formal grammarians, but incorrect) to say "It's me" because "is" is a linking verb. Do these people understand that we cannot control how language is used in practice?? Are there any sites online that are flexible enough to ensure they're not saying that the rule that we use subject pronouns after linking verbs is followed by good speakers even in everyday talk?? Georgia guy (talk) 16:12, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Are the usage guides you're reading 100 years old? Any modern guide will tell you that the use of objective pronouns after "to be" is now practically universal. Zacwill (talk) 16:42, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Zacwill, I find them by doing Google searches on sites like Grammar Monster. Here's a page that really says it is incorrect: https://englishplus.com/grammar/00000021.htm Georgia guy (talk) 17:08, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

In general "usage guides" are for written language, not spoken. It would be unusual to say It's me (or It is I, for that matter) in print. --Trovatore (talk) 18:19, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Usage guides are usually conservative, because writing or saying the technically correct "x" will rarely annoy anyone, while writing/saying the technically incorrect but casually popular "y" may offend a significant number (such as officials, job interviewers, prospective in-laws, etc.) even if only on the unconscious level. In anything beyond so-called "social media", written English is usually expected to be more formal or 'correct' than spoken.

Most if not all languages have different registers of speech, 'ascending' from how one might speak to fellow youths in the street, through friends, parents, work colleagues, employers, speech audiences, and (say) judges, perhaps culminating in royalty. These registers can include different grammatical constructions, so saying "It's me" (and similar locutions) is appropriate at many levels at which "It is I" would be laughable, whereas saying "It's me" might be less appropriate than "It is I" (or similar) when, say, getting knighted. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 20:03, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Notice how even in this thread, nobody considers the form "it's I". Why? Because it would be a mix of registers. "It is I" is formal, "it's me" is informal, but "it's I" is just not used at all, except perhaps for comical effect. — Kpalion^(talk) 10:12, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

"It is I, Leclerc!" DuncanHill (talk) 11:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

So if you can't say either "it's me" or "it's I", how can you say it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

It's-a-me! ---Sluzzelin talk 12:34, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

You can say either: the former (though incorrect by strict grammatical rules) will sound normally acceptable in anything but very formal speech, the latter (though correct by those rules) will sound odd, suggestive of not-native English or an attempt at 19th-century style.

Grammatical 'rules' are an after-the-fact attempt to analyse and systematise how people speak and write (a long and ongoing process of evolution-by-consensus); they are not some Platonic ideal from which speech and writing stem. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 19:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

L'État, c'est moi. If it was good enough for Louis XIV, it's good enough for moi. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:26, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

In the Indo-European languages with grammatical case I'm familiar with, the nominative case is used for both the subject and the predicative expression. So this shows once again that English has lost its case system. Which doesn't mean that Germans normally say Es ist ich. They turn it around: Ich bin's "I'm it." Or if they want to emphasise the it-part: Das bin ich "That am I." And so do the Dutch. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:05, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

In Swedish, the main option is mainly the nominative Det är jag, while I think that in Danish and Norwegian, on the other hand, it's the oblique Det er meg. (I'm not sure on whether Det here should be interpreted as it or that though, as Scandinavian basically only has one single word.) 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 15:07, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

In colloquial German one would say, Das bin ich or Ich bin's (with overlapping but not identical meanings), not Es bin ich.  ​‑‑Lambiam 19:57, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

In Italian you would say sono io, again conjugating the verb to agree with "I". Italian is a pro-drop language but I'm not sure what pronoun you would be said to be dropping here. Spanish seems to be similar, at least if Don Quixote can be trusted in his musical version. If that's playing in your head right now, you're welcome; if it isn't, get some culture, baby. --Trovatore (talk) 20:03, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

«Io sono io, don Chichì è don Chichì.»^[13]  ​‑‑Lambiam 19:20, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey, Trovatore, I had that Broadway-cast album as a teenager, and I well remember Richard Kiley belting out "It is I, Don Quixote, the lord of La Mancha. ..." Deor (talk) 20:56, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Nice. But the lyric is "I am I, Don Quixote". Presumably calqued from Spanish soy yo, I'd guess, which would be the same as Italian sono io. --Trovatore (talk) 23:18, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

You're right, of course. My memory isn't what it once was. Deor (talk) 01:02, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

May 29

The Isle of Man

I'd like to have a go at rewriting the Name section on the Isle of Man article (which is somewhat messy at the moment) and am in the process of gathering sources. I'm having trouble finding any that discuss the Manx name for the island (Mannin), however. Wiktionary claims that the name was originally Mana but that the dative form later displaced the nominative form. This sounds plausible (the same thing happened with Albain in Irish), but I can't find anything outside Wiktionary that endorses it. The seven-volume work Placenames of the Isle of Man is useless in this regard, devoting only one paragraph to the name of the island itself. Zacwill (talk) 16:25, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Maybe not terribly helpful, but see The Name 'Man' in Gaelic Literature and Topography by W. Walter Gill.

Also Manx Place-Names: an Ulster View. Alansplodge (talk) 16:46, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

The Place-Names of the Isle of Man With their Origin and History (1925) by John Joseph Kneen; especially Introduction: The Isle of Man... Its Name (p. xxii) (PS: I've just seen that you said this was useless, but there appears to be more than one paragraph in the linked section). Alansplodge (talk) 16:52, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

This is helpful, thanks. I was referring to a different work with a similar title in my original post. This one I hadn't come across yet. Zacwill (talk) 17:01, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

You're most welcome (I probably should have clicked on your link first!). Alansplodge (talk) 17:11, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I have not explored its 26 pages of dense text, but the booklet "Mann" or "Man" (by the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, no less) may have some bearing? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 22:20, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

May 30

What languages have the earliest and latest start and end era for "Middle"?

And what languages have the earliest/latest end dates for "Early Modern"? Also I see large differences in dates for Early Modern English like mid-17th century or 1800 for the transition to Modern English why? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:52, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Why? Because these are arbitrary labels imposed on a process (Language change) that in this instance was mostly continuous, and different scholars disagree on how to define and apply them.

In history, one can point to and argue about specific events that might be used to mark transitions from one period to another; these might be battles, invasions, or changes of rulership, and in more distant eras broader events like adoptions of new pottery styles or new metals, or whatever.

What sort of markers can be used to make precise deliniations in the history of a language that develops mostly continuously, though unevenly according to local regions within its range and the educational levels of its speakers and writers? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 17:30, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

(ec) There is no reason to expect any systematicity in such arbitrary labels as "Early", "Middle" and "Modern"; each of these will obviously be relative to the overall temporal outline of the development of a language. There are things like Middle Egyptian and Middle Babylonian – you'll probably find your "earliest" examples somewhere there. "Middle Persian" seems to be slightly older than "Middle Chinese", and so on. It's only in the European languages that there has been something of a convention to tie these labels to the overall cultural era terms for the "Middle Ages" and the "Modern Era", so if a language has a "Middle" phase, it will most likely be located somewhere in what is conventionally described as the medieval period. Not many languages besides English and German seem to have conventional periodization involving a separate "Early Modern" stage. Still, the individual period boundaries between such stages will differ quite widely between languages, depending when each of them had significant changes in their social and structural status (e.g., when did a language develop literacy, when did it produce particular highlights of "classic" literature, when did it get affected by the changes brought about by book printing, when did it experience particular pushes towards standardization, and so on. "Middle French" is significantly later than "Middle English" and "Middle High German", while "Middle Irish" is a good bit earlier; "Old Polish" is generally synchronous with "Middle" rather than Old English; Spanish has "Classical Spanish" where English has its "Early Modern", and so on. Much of this is of course primarily related to when each language started to be widely written. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:53, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Is any evolutionary stage of a living Modern [Language] that's older than Middle Aramaic called Middle [Language]? Does any Middle [Language] end later than Middle Frisian? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:24, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

If you consider Coptic to be the modern continuation of Ancient Egyptian — it has died out as an everyday language, but is still used as the liturgical language of the Coptic Orthodox and Coptic Catholic Churches). Middle Egyptian as a language spanned 2000–300 BCE, compared to Middle Aramaic's 200 BCE to 200 CE.

Middle Persian spanned 450 BCE to 650 CE; Modern or New Persian is also called Farsi, or Iranian, Dari and Tajik where spoken specifically in Iran, Afghanistan and Tajikistan.

Afrikaans had a 'Proto-Afrikaans' stage in the 19th century CE; if it were analysed into 'Early' 'Middle' and 'Modern' stages, "Middle Afrikaans" would certainly post-date Middle Frisian (1550–1800 CE).

Hebrew, though a contemporary of Ancient Aramaic, died out as a regularly-spoken language by about 400 CE if not earlier (scholars argue, some say 200 BCE) though it persisted in written-only form. Modern Hebrew's revival from the late 19th century might be thought of as the creation of a new language, which if analysed into stages might yield a "Middle Modern Hebrew" within the 20th century — but I doubt that any linguist has done that. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 01:09, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

The Middle-Atlantic Accent was in fashion until around 1950. --Amble (talk) 21:30, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Middle geographically not temporally. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:52, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

May 31

"Good" ship

Where does the habit/style/preference of calling a ship "good" come from? Lightfoot uses the construction a few different ways in The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald and of course there's the plane of On the Good Ship Lollipop. More infamously, there's the much earlier Good Ship Venus. How did the "good" appellation become standard? Matt Deres (talk) 14:44, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

I've only found an even earlier song: I sailed in the good ship the Kitty (c1777-1778), by Charles Dibdin. There's some uncited speculation on a language board that it originally meant a "goods ship" as opposed to a warship. Alansplodge (talk) 17:01, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Aha! A bit more digging reveals that the traditional formula for a bill of lading (a certificate from a shipper that goods had been received and loaded onto a particular vessel) was from the 18th century:

"Shipped by the Grace of God in good Order, and well conditioned by... in and upon the good ship called the..."

(From THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BILL OF LADING: ITS FUTURE IN THE MARITIME INDUSTRY (p. 52))

The "good ship" element was a confirmation that the ship was in a seaworthy condition. Apparently, the need to make this declaration was removed in the UK by the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1924. [14]

Alansplodge (talk) 17:22, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Persuant to the above, I found this text of a bill of lading of 1636:

Shipped by the grace of God in good order and well-conditioned by Mee, Thomas Goold merchant in and vpon the good Ship called the Mayflower of London. Whereof is Master under God for this present voyage Willyam Badiley and now riding at ankor in the Riuer of Lisboa and by Gods grace bound for London to say tene Chests of sugarrs namely Muscouado & 2 whites for the account present of the worshipfull Thomas Crossing of Exon merchant being marked and numbred as in the margent and are to be deliuerd in the like good order and wel conditioned at the ofersaid Port of London (the danger of the Seas only excepted) vnto Master Richard Poerry, or in his Absense Hugh Sander or to their assignes, he or they payning fraight for the said goods, After 16/8 per chest with primage and Avarage accustomed. An witness wherof the Master or Purser of the said ship hath affirmed to three Bills of Lading all of this tenont and date, the one of which three Bills being accomplished, the other two to stand void. And so God send the good Ship to her desired Port in safety. Amen. [15]

Alansplodge (talk) 17:42, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Interesting. Whether it's directly derived from "goods ship" or not, it seems like "goods", "good order", and "good ship" share a long history. Before posting, I wondered if perhaps it came from the ratings ships were given for insurance purposes. Example. If given the choice, people would want their goods carried on a "good" ship. Matt Deres (talk) 19:08, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

OED has it "In extended use of a ship, town, river, etc. (chiefly with reference to things personified or conventionally treated as feminine" under good: "Of a person: distinguished by admirable or commendable qualities; worthy, estimable, fine" in a 1400 MS of the Cursor Mundi, "Euer-mare þai lokid doun. quen þat gode ship sulde droun", and 1589 in Hakluytt "Being imbarked in the good shippe, called the Gallion of London". DuncanHill (talk) 18:59, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

So having a good ship is like finding a good woman? Or man, for that matter, though I hear those are hard to find. Matt Deres (talk) 19:10, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Or good hearts. DuncanHill (talk) 19:54, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

For some reason specifically for doctors, the good doctor, but rarely the good nurse.^[16]  ​‑‑Lambiam 05:53, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm reminded of goodwife and goodman, and good-king-henry. It's a medieval honorific, seems calling everything respected "good" was once a common habit.  Card Zero  (talk) 10:25, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

And Good Queen Bess. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:37, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

May 19

Filling in a measure of 10/16

A measure of 10/16 means that it can be filled with 2 groups of 5 sixteenth notes. We can easily use eighth notes and dotted eighth notes to represent longer notes that don't cross the middle of the measure. If we wanted 2 equal notes in a 10/16 measure, each one would be a dotted eighth note tied to an eighth note. But what if we wanted to fill in a measure of 10/16 with a single note?? What note would we use?? Georgia guy (talk) 15:14, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Using the (IMO somewhat illogical) notation for tuplets, in which ⌜3:2⌝ over a group of three quavers means that the three notes together have the same duration as two quavers, placing ⌜1:10⌝ over a singleton group of one semiquaver should mean, "play this note with the duration of ten semiquavers. (Placing instead ⌜10⌝ over a whole or half note, while not a proper generalization of more conventional tuplet indications, may actually be clearer.) Performing artists may initially be puzzled, but if your note fills a bar, I expect they'll figure it out.  ​‑‑Lambiam 15:41, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

What's illogical about the tuplet notation?? What would be more logical?? Georgia guy (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

What is illogical is that the indication usually only identifies the number of notes, as seen in

.

This is redundant information. I can count and see there are five notes for myself. What is missing from this notation is the most crucial bit of information: it fails to indicate the time in which this group has to be played. When we encounter this, it will usually be four eights, the time of a half note, but it could occasionally, say in a piece in ⁶
₈, also be three or six eights. We have to infer this from the context.  ​‑‑Lambiam 21:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I remember noticing this strange redundancy the first time I ever encountered such notation, over 60 years ago. My teacher didn't seem to think it was anything noteworthy but just the way things are done, so I just absorbed it. I think this is the first time since then that I've ever seen anyone else mentioning it. (If only we had AI creating music notation for us, we could be rid of the almost unbearable weight of these nonsensical conventions.) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:07, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

As an aside, this sort of tuplet notation is not something that is used in real life, outside of perhaps the most avant-garde of modern classical music; "⌜1:10⌝" is not an indication that would be commonly understood by performers. (I'm refraining from stating that this sort of notation doesn't exist, as I'm sure you have experience with it somewhere, but in my years of performing just about every sort of notated Western music there is I've never encountered it before, save perhaps in a Finale tuplet entry dialogue. :) ) I do agree with your assessment of the more common tuplet notation, though — reading through your comment I found myself rejecting the idea that a tuplet of five quavers could fill the space of three regular quavers in 6/8 time (this would be represented rather with semiquavers), but I couldn't come up with a music-theoretical reason why – it just "feels wrong". Q.E.D. (fugues) (talk) 21:59, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

10/16 is a complex meter, so the notationally "correct" answer depends on the grouping employed by the composer. (Again, as a complex meter, there is no "default" grouping for 10/16 that can be established in isolation. It cannot simply be divided into "two groups of five," as you say, because 5/16 is itself complex — beat groupings always consist of either two or three beats.) The most common groupings for 10-beat meters are 2+2+3+3 and 3+3+2+2; in the former case, the "correct" way to group a note spanning the entire bar would be a quarter note tied to a dotted quarter note, or perhaps two eighth notes tied with two dotted eighth notes in more conservative engraving styles. (2+3+2+3 and its inverse are rarely seen, as in such groupings two bars of 5 would generally be preferred.) (fugues) (talk) 22:15, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Let Your Love Flow

And then while you're mopping it up can anyone tell me if the Larry E. Williams who wrote Let Your Love Flow is the Larry Williams who wrote Dizzy Miss Lizzie? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 19:36, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

The article about that song indicates that its writer Williams was a roadie for Neil Diamond. How likely is the Dizzy Miss Lizzie writer to have been a roadie for Diamond? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:48, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Interestingly, they were both named Lawrence Eugene Williams, according to Discogs. The writer of "Let Your Love Flow" used his middle initial in credits in order to distinguish himself from his more famous namesake. Xuxl (talk) 13:27, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

May 23

Ghost (Swedish band)

Hi, I’m a new editor who’s only made about 12 edits total. Recent edits were made by myself in reference to the most recent line-up changes (as of May 2025) which was reverted very shortly after. Due to the nature of the band, it is hard to find sources relating to the status of the musicians, which makes edits like the one I made appear not credible even though we can physically see the change in line-up. A lot of the ‘evidence’ for changes in members are either observation and consensus, or sometimes social media posts from insiders (e.g. Vanessa Warwick’s confirmation that Jutty Taylor had “left the tour for personal reasons” via a comment on her own Instagram), or even less commonly the members themselves which may require interpretation (e.g. Mad Gallica announcing via social media that she will focus on her solo career, and then being evidently replaced in the most recent tour). Essentially I ask, if there is information known to be true regarding updates in the 2025 lineup (i.e. Cumulus departed from the band after the 2023 Re-Imperatour, Aurora was moved to Cumulus’ place on keys, Gabriela Gunčíková is the new backing vocalist — which we know from literally just seeing her face, and one social media post from a friend of hers —, Jutty Taylor departed from tour 9 days in) but only sources such as the aforementioned are available, how am I able to provide updated information with a lack of sources? Is it possible, should I not bother, is outdated info not misinformation? Other editors are likely going to (and already have) disregarded and revert edits that cite things like Warwick’s social media or nothing at all, so I don’t know what to do! :( Is.not.here (talk) 01:01, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, sorry about the way that reliable sources lag behind observable reality. Your edit to Gabriela Gunčíková regarding the Satanized video still stands, I see. It's possible that a similar modest edit to the Ghost article, at the point where this video is mentioned, to say that she is in it, would survive. Generally, one small edit at a time will increase the survival rate. One way around poor quality sources is to write person said that x is true, avoiding the stronger assertion of x is true (reference: person). This approach of attribution is mentioned at WP:RSOPINION, which also links to WP:ABOUTSELF, the rule that social media posts may be used as sources for facts about the person who posted. So Mad Gallica's remarks about focusing on her solo career could be included, without interpretation. It is probably too soon, and too provocative, to edit those boxes displaying the lineup.  Card Zero  (talk) 09:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so so much! This is super helpful and I’ll definitely try out your advice, I hope you don’t mind if I come back to ask related questions if they come up. I appreciate the help! Is.not.here (talk) 12:03, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Of course, you're welcome.  Card Zero  (talk) 21:50, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Most interesting/intense/notorious reference desk threads?

Hi, reference desk regulars, I was looking through the reference desk archives for some of the longest, most intense, or otherwise interesting discussions. I realized that I could probably... ask the reference desk itself. So, any memorable threads you recommend? Any particularly intense efforts to track down a dubious factoid or elusive source? Any recurring disagreements? Serious examinations of silly topics, like this investigation into whether a Roman emperor invented the Whoopee Cushion, are also welcome. Thanks for all you do here. I don't visit the reference desk nearly as often as I should! Annierau (talk) 06:18, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

If you're looking for the dumbest, most pointless, discussions, try going through the talk page archive. God, what a mess; we're a lot better now. It's not RD-related, but have you seen Wikipedia:Unusual articles? Matt Deres (talk) 17:10, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Please suitly emphazi.  ​‑‑Lambiam 22:13, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I remember all the Tim Cahill questions, the brilliant responses of the much missed User:Clio the Muse, the trolls, the constant 'What type of fallacy is this' weirdness, the injokes, the spats between X and Y and X and Z.

There have been many epic threads but they're hard to dig out - there used to be an offwiki website with some Best Ofs but it's long been deleted.

Now - if your question was 'which responses are you most proud of?' or 'which ones do you remember and chuckle' then I've got some I recall fondly. YMMV. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, Nanonic (talk) 23:05, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Let us not forget the Russian(?) with the impenetrable physics questions, who regularly followed up their questions with a cascade of unclarifying comments. —Tamfang (talk) 20:14, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

This one made me laugh at the time. A real "old man yells at cloud" situation. Matt Deres (talk) 16:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Clio the Muse was a fake, and a rather unpleasant one at that. This thread belongs on the RD talk page, but I guess it's too late for that now. --Viennese Waltz 18:59, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

@Viennese Waltz: I often wondered about her. There were a couple of things she said that were off, as I recall. DuncanHill (talk) 20:17, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

For my part, I rather liked Clio, and I too miss her. Deor (talk) 14:40, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

A fake what? Matt Deres (talk) 15:16, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

See [17] and [18]. --Viennese Waltz 15:30, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

She seemed confused about when she was born as well, as I recall. DuncanHill (talk) 15:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Well, I don't remember my birth either. —Tamfang (talk) 22:52, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

She changed her age more than once (She was 24 in August 2007, having been 26 in February. She went from being a doctor, to having completed work on her PhD, to working on a PhD (in that order). You can look through here userpage history yourself if you've the stomach for it. DuncanHill (talk) 16:06, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

I was really annoyed, not at Cleo per se, but at the way many editors were so starstruck by her that they said they would cut and paste her Ref Desk answers verbatim into articles. If anyone had ever queried the source of these additions, they would have had to be content with "Clio the Muse said so". So much for our rigorous sourcing protocols. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Ah, fair enough. I just assume everyone on Wikipedia is a dog. Matt Deres (talk) 17:46, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Just three years ago, there was this Indonesian person who was annoyed at the English language, becoming so annoyed as to declare "I am really annoying now".  Card Zero  (talk) 18:05, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

The choice of word may have reflected an unconscious grasp of English semantics.  ​‑‑Lambiam 21:33, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

I do miss the British chap who lived in Texas with a Mini and a MINI and was very helpful on the Science desk. I'm terrible at names. DuncanHill (talk) 20:33, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

That's Steve Baker, who wrote this classic introduction to 3D graphics, Matrices can be your friends. Found a short bio here. Card Zero  (talk) 21:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

May 24

Sean Feucht

Is Sean Feucht's surname really pronounced /fʌkt/, or is this willful vandalism? 2601:644:4301:D1B0:B0C3:AE84:797B:C03 (talk) 20:13, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

This was added on May 20 in a drive-by edit by an anonymous IP, the only edit made from the IP address. Even disregarding the semantics, this is an unlikely pronunciation of the name, so this is almost certainly vandalism. I have reverted it.  ​‑‑Lambiam 21:32, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Good move. But truth is sometimes stranger than fiction. I know of a person whose name is "Cupid Fuck", pronounced exactly how you'd expect. He was from a non-English background, if that helps any. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

I grew up in the 1050s an area of Australia with thousands of European immigrants. The lifeguard at the local pool was Otto Fuchs, from Germany. He officially changed his surname to Ford. HiLo48 (talk) 00:04, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

One would expect a name change to Fox, which is a common name in English, sounds almost the same as German Fuchs (/fʊks/) and even means the same (it's a cognate). Feucht may also be from German, with German pronunciation /fɔɪ̯çt/. Most Americans will make a mess of that. It means "moist", not exactly a common name in English. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:24, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

You missed the point on what it sounds like. To normal teenage boys, the regular clientele at the pool, they weren't likely to know or to research the correct translation of Fuchs. To their semi-developed and testosterone driven minds, it looked like fucks. So that's what they said. Otto went for something a bit further removed. HiLo48 (talk) 01:21, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Not necessarily "moist", as the towns of Feucht and Feuchtwangen both derive their name from Fichte, i.e. spruce tree. The same may be true for the surname. Doesn't affect the pronunciation, of course. --Wrongfilter (talk) 09:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Does Feuchtwangen sound like "damp cheeks"?  Card Zero  (talk) 10:23, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

But better known since 2004 -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 19:35, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

What a strange coincidence, I'm reading Going Postal at the moment - Lipwig comes from the equivalent of Bavaria, where I now learn the town of Feucht is located. 'Lip Wig' is slang for a 'moustache' a common addition to a disguise.[19] Damn, he was really good at multi-layered humour, cunning puns everywhere. MinorProphet (talk) 15:34, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

May 25

British radio comedy

The article Comedian describes the origin of radio comedy in America, then jumps to Without a Hollywood supply of comedians to draw from, radio comedy did not begin in the United Kingdom until a generation later, i.e. the 1950s. This is opaque to me. Was there a steady stream of American acts on the BBC until 1930, then only talks and light music until the first Goon Show? Doug butler (talk) 15:02, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

That's not how I would parse it. In the US, Hollywood comedians often moved to radio. Not having such a source, radio comedies didn't start in the UK until somewhat later. There's no mention of an existence and then a gap and then a resurgence; just a later creation. Personally, that still sounds dubious to me. Matt Deres (talk) 15:23, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Matt Deres:. You've given me the key to the OP's intention. Doug butler (talk) 21:52, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Our Lizzie (Helena Millais) broadcast "'comedy fragments from life" in 1922. That Child, a sitcom, was broadcast in 1926. Ronald Frankau "started broadcasting saucy jokes on the radio in an Etonian tone for the BBC" in 1925, Murgatroyd and Winterbottom were broadcast on the BBC from 1935, Band Waggon started in 1938, ITMA started in 1939. See Foster, Andy; Furst, Steve (1996). "1: The Beginnings of Radio Comedy and the 1930s". Radio Comedy 1938-1968 A Guide to 30 Years of Wonderful Wireless (PDF). London: Virgin Publishing Ltd. ISBN 0-86369-960-X. DuncanHill (talk) 15:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Britain had a rich tradition of Music hall, Variety show and Pantomime comedy to draw on. A comparative (to the US) scarcity of comedy on earlier British radio is more likely a reflection of the attitudes of those controlling early radio content wanting a more 'highbrow' tone.

In the early 1920s the British Government via the General Post Office controlled licences to broadcast quite tightly, explicitly to avoid the potentially detrimental situation developing in the less-controlled US. They oversaw consolidation of the half-dozen significant commercial broadcasters into the BBC in 1922 and rendered this non-commercial in 1926. In a geographically smaller and more densely populated country, independent local radio broadcasting did not reappear until the 1960s.

Any residual discouragement of comedy on the radio was discarded during the Second World War, when many comedians and comedy (or comedy-containing) shows, such as Danger – Men at Work!, The Happidrome, Hi Gang!, It's That Man Again aka ITMA, Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh, Stand Easy, and Variety Bandbox were broadcast to maintain national morale. Further radio comedy shows appeared between 1945 and 1950.

The assertions in the (rather US PoV) articles Comedian (linked by the OP) and Radio Comedy that "Radio comedy did not begin in the United Kingdom until a generation later, with such popular 1950s shows as . . ." are simply inaccurate. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 19:05, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

That's really useful, thank you. Doug butler (talk) 22:31, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Doug butler, I found 1940s BBC Comedy - A selection of English comedy radio shows from the 1940s.

Also The BBC's first comedy star – and how he fell into obscurity, an article about Norman Clapham (stage name John Henry) who was the first resident comedian on BBC Radio, working from May 1923 until the death of his stage partner and lover, followed by his subsequent suicide in 1934. Alansplodge (talk) 16:50, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Because I Tell a Joke or Two: Comedy, Politics and Social Difference (p. 3) has a brief overview of British radio sitcoms in the 1930s and 1940s.

Alansplodge (talk) 16:50, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

A sad story, and most interesting. Thanks AS. Doug butler (talk) 22:11, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

The Oscar Wilde BBC Radio Drama Collection

Can I ask are both part 1 and 2 from The Trials of Oscar Wilde from 1996 from the BBC radio series Saturday Playhouse read by Simon Russell Beale included on the audio CD The Oscar Wilde BBC Radio Drama Collection. Matthew John Drummond (talk) 15:23, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

@Matthew John Drummond: By the looks of this page no, The Trials of Oscar Wilde is not included. I haven't been able to find a release of the Saturday Playhouse production, which was written by Christopher Fits-Simon. DuncanHill (talk) 20:30, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

The page says Simon Russell Beale (Read by) on the website and The Trials of Oscar Wilde the BBC radio series Saturday Playhouse is the only radio adaptation that Simon Russell Beale has been in. Matthew John Drummond (talk) 21:27, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

It says "Moving examples of his correspondence are revealed in The Letters of Oscar Wilde and De Profundis, read by Simon Callow and Simon Russell Beale respectively".

May 29

Re-watching The Passion of The Christ for the first time in years

Talking about the scene where Pilate orders Jesus to be flogged (in the hope that this will appease the angry mob), but not killed. Then the Roman soldiers proceed to go too far once they've got him on their own and absolutely beat the hell out of him with spiked flails to the point that his skin is falling off and you can see his ribs exposed. They would surely have continued until he was dead if their Centurion hadn't walked in and angrily stopped them.

I've never read the majority of The Bible. Was it ever explained why the soldiers disobeyed direct orders? Or was this something solely from the movie? 146.200.107.90 (talk) 15:06, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

The Bible doesn't go into that much detail on the flogging. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

In fact, each of the gospels states merely that Pilate had Jesus flogged^[20][21][22] or that he would have him punished.^[23]  ​‑‑Lambiam 20:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

It's called dramatization. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:17, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

A lot of the detail was derived from "purported mystical visions attributed to Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:33, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I just saw another website that said that. As far as these things go, does this count as "historically accurate" then, as far as these things go? Seems like Gibson did more research on this movie than he did for Braveheart. 146.200.107.90 (talk) 22:56, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

It's "historically accurate" insofar as some people previously imagined or "had visions" of such things. How much any of it conforms to actual, but undocumented, details of the events centuries earlier is, to say the least, unprovable. {The poster formerly known as 87.981.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 23:14, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm sure it's as historically accurate as any other Biblical epic. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:47, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

More so since it's 0% English 100% subtitles. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:06, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

So it is just as historically accurate as, for example, Michelangelo's portrayal of the serpent of Eden.  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:19, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

You mean they didn't talk English, like in Ben-Hur? A mix of American, British and Israeli accents? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:06, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't know if you know it's 100% subtitles not speaking English with an Aramaic/Latin/Hebrew accent. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:43, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes. Although I didn't see the movie, I had understood it was in Aramaic with some brand of English in subtitles. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:17, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

The original plan was 100% Aramaic/Latin/Hebrew no subtitles whatsoever. Pilate spoke broken Aramaic to Jesus He answer in Latin due to omniscience Pilate surprised as not many Jewish persons in Israel knew it. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:34, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Language of Jesus § Other languages suggests that Romans and Jews would communicate in Greek, as the lingua franca of the Empire (see also Roman Empire § Languages). Note also John 19:20. 213.143.143.69 (talk) 13:44, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Which would make Pilate surprised as a Jewish Israeli would want to learn Greek and/or Hebrew before Latin and the family name Pontius suggests Samnite from Italy. Could the Jesus unit(s) have been Latinophone or would they be Grecophone and/or Aramaophone to minimize long expensive travel? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:39, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

To be clear, the term Israeli is normally used only to refer to the people of the modern State of Israel (since 1948). It would not normally be used to refer to a person who lived there during the time of the Roman Empire, or earlier, or any time before the mid-20th century. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:44, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

A Jew in Judaea would probably have self-identified as עִבְרַי (ʿiḇray), or when speaking Koine Ἑβραῖος (Hebraîos). A common English exonym is Israelite, which however has too many meanings to be very useful.  ​‑‑Lambiam 06:43, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

That said, Yeshua was from all the evidence a native of Galilee (though he may not have been born there) rather than Judaea.

Galilee was formerly part of Israel, not Judah, had at that date a separate ruler (Herod Antipas) to Judaea (which Pilate ruled directly), was separated from Judah by Samaria, whose capital of the same name had been Israel's capital, and Galileans had, amongst other things, a distinctive accent that Judaeans recognised and sometimes mocked (hence the account of Peter being recognised as a follower of Yeshua by his accent).

The identity of Israel as a nation encompassing Judah still had religious significance – from Daniel and other apocalyptic texts, "The Son of Man" was understood as a sort of divine personification of Israel, who was to lead an angelic assault that would restore a true Messiah (a Davidic-descended king) to the re-united throne – so Jeshua might have used it in some contexts, though probably not in speaking to Pilate on whom the nuances would have been lost. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 09:16, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

May 30

Beatles song genre

Our article on Don't Pass Me By tells me that it is country rock. The source is dead. I see neither country nor rock in the song. Country rock is supposed to involve "country themes, vocal styles, and additional instrumentation, most characteristically pedal steel guitars." There are no pedal steel guitars. Must we say "country rock"? HiLo48 (talk) 05:50, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Personally I have no problem with calling the song country rock. The critical reception song lists several sources which describe it as a countryish song. And the country rock article refers to the song in the "expansion" section. What genre would you describe it as? --Viennese Waltz 06:27, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

None of the common ones. Is it required that a song have a genre? HiLo48 (talk) 07:03, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

If you mean is it required for the infobox, then I don't know - speak to the people in charge of that infobox. If you mean in general, yes - it's possible to assign a genre to every piece of music. --Viennese Waltz 07:16, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

That's a pretty absolute claim. Got a source for it? HiLo48 (talk) 07:25, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

The genre is "no genre"....196.50.199.218 (talk) 08:44, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Obviously you can give any item (song) a classification (genre). But some classifications will be pretty limited, possibly only a single item will be included. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:26, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

That means you'd have to come up with a name for this putative genre, and if it contained only one example it would hardly be a recognised genre, would it now? Just because some piece can't be neatly slotted into any existing genre doesn't mean it's in a genre of its own. It's simply unclassifiable. If you can find 50 pieces of unclassifiable music, they wouldn't form an "unclassified" genre. No, each would be uniquely unclassifiable, and none of them would get a genre name. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Why wouldn't they? I see no problem with a single piece being its own genre. Every genre starts with only a single example. Some become massively popular, inspiring a host of others. Some have more modest followings. And others remain singletons. That doesn't make them any less distinct. Maybe that comes from my bio background. There are many single species genera and even single species families. All that matters is their distinction from other genera or families. The idea of single piece genres seems perfectly fine to me. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 00:07, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

On the "The Beatles" website (maintained by Apple Corps, so it can hardly get more official), the infobox on their page for "Don't Pass Me By" has "Genre    Country rock".  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:05, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Official. Maybe. But I don't understand it. HiLo48 (talk) 09:39, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Many of the songs that Ringo sang for the Beatles, and in his subsequent solo career, have a country style to them. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:38, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

There's a very country style to the fiddle playing in it. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:29, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

There's that, there's the chorus's final "don't pass me by" (after "I hate to see you go") which can remind one of "because you're mine" in "I Walk the Line" ... the verses can remind one of folky ballad stanzas as heard, for example, in "The Yellow Rose of Texas". Personally, I think country rock is fitting enough (and I'm not a huge fan of genre categorization). ---Sluzzelin talk 21:55, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

June 1

Please help to fact-check this page

Hi, I'm a volunteer reviewing the article. It passes all formal requirements, so I am now going to approve the draft. But due to the intense sport vocabulary used, I cannot understand, nor verify, that 100% of the content is correct. Could you please check it? If there is something wrong, edits may be made within up to 24 hours from now. Thank you! Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 10:53, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm trying to figure out why this is newsworthy outside a routine sports coverage page such as ESPN.com. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:43, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

That page is blank, but the current top article on Wikinews matches the title.  Card Zero  (talk) 11:58, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

I think the OP meant to link to n:Baseball: Detroit Tigers sweep San Francisco Giants, making their fourth win in a row. The main problem I see with this article is a lack of freshness; I'm not sure who would be looking for an article about a May 28 baseball game that doesn't get published until June 1, after the Detroit Tigers had already played other games on May 30 and 31. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 21:13, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

May 19

Explain on Print Encyclopedias

Why are there only few print encyclopedias being published today? And why isn’t Wikipedia making official and real print copies anytime soon? What is the purpose if they are going all digital? 107.115.29.138 (talk) 19:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Print media is right up-to-date the moment the contributors stop contributing and the editors stop editing. The manuscript then goes to the printers, and after printing in each language desired, the bulky, resource-intensive printed media is physically shipped hundreds and thousands of miles to warehouses. There, the bulk packages of books are broken down into smaller batches for distribution to wholesalers. After the books arrive at the wholesalers' warehouses, they they are distributed (usually by truck) to retailers. Once the books are on the retail shelves, customers -- some of whom may have pre-ordered, but most of whom will only see the edition after it is on the shelves -- purchase the book. It is then taken home (or to a library; adding additional delay) for use. This process takes months, during which time there is no updating. If one is lucky, the edition being consulted is only a year or so out-of-date. As for Wikipedia, the charm and beauty of it is that the last time the contributors stopped contributing and the editors stopped editing -- about five seconds ago -- is possibly the point at which it begins to go out-of-date. That process, however, stops when the next contributor / editor makes a change. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 22:23, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

More information about this print encyclopedia? 2600:387:F:4B16:0:0:0:9 (talk) 05:31, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Reading this thoroughly may help explain why Wikipedia isn't printed. More info on size here. And some ancient history relating to producing a version that could be printed. Btw, there was once a facility for producing books of Wikipedia articles that could be printed. That can still be done manually, with printing through specialized third parties, I believe -- but I've never had any interest in trying it. -- Avocado (talk) 12:44, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Farret's Head, Scotland

In a book on mental calculators, I read that George Parker Bidder as a young boy was asked by Queen Charlotte: "How many days would a Snail be creeping, at the rate of 8 feet per day, from the Land's End, in Cornwall, to Ferret's Head, in Scotland, the distance by admeasurement being 838 miles?" (He immediately gave the correct answer of 553,080).

I tried looking up "Ferret's Head", but I couldn't find any such named location in Scotland. I would assume it is another name for John o' Groats or perhaps Duncansby Head, and indeed the shortest route by car from Land's End to John o' Groats is 838 miles. Is anyone aware of such a location in Scotland named Ferret's Head? Dreykop (talk) 19:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

After some further digging on the topic, I found that some sources actually spell it as "Farret's Head", but I still can't find any such place. Dreykop (talk) 19:53, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Possibly an egregious misreading of Dunnet Head, or a mishearing / alternative spelling of Faraid Head, or a confusion with Farr Point (no article)?

[Edited to add] I favour Faraid Head myself. Depending on the source of the anecdote, it's possible that someone (perhaps unfamiliar with this remote Scottish location) misunderstood Queen Charlotte's strong German accent. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.170.37 (talk) 23:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, Faraid Head sounds best, though seems to me a rather unremarkable location to be used in such a question. Makes one wonder what's so interesting about it that Queen Charlotte would know that the distance to it is 838 miles. Also, just curious, how did you know all these places? Dreykop (talk) 04:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Being an elderly Brit (who lived in Scotland for a while), I have general familiarity with the UK's geography, and I have various atlases and maps to hand. I just looked along the North Scottish coast for points and headlands with possibly relevant names. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.170.37 (talk) 13:26, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Presumably, some published list of trivia that Charlotte had at her disposal contained an item like, "the longest distance between any two points on the island of Great Britain is between A and B, having been admeasured to be X miles". (Google Maps gives a walking distance of 804 miles.^[24])  ​‑‑Lambiam 07:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

For instance, in A new and accurate description of all the direct and principal cross roads in Great Britain (Paterson, 1771) is written From the Land's End in Cornwall to Farout Head, the neareſt way, (viz. by Briſtol, Carliſle, Edinburgh and Inverneſs,) is 838 miles. This information is repeated six years later in Owen's book of roads, which looks suspiciously like Paterson's book of roads, but in pocket format.  Card Zero  (talk) 19:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

I just found that there actually is something remarkable about Faraid Head: The line from Mull of Galloway, the southernmost point of Scotland, and Faraid Head runs almost perfectly north to south (with a heading of only around 0.49 degrees), which makes it the longest line due north and south one could draw on a map of Scotland, at least according to this source. Dreykop (talk) 06:00, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Looking at some older maps of Scotland from the National Library of Scotland's website (listed here), Faraid Head has also been labelled as "Farout Hd." or "Farrid Hd.", or "Fair Aird", or possibly "Mills Farritt". This makes the ID more convincing. Dreykop (talk) 18:40, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

It looks like the speed of 8 feet per day was chosen to make the calculation easier and the distance of 838 miles (with the repeating digit 8) and the number of feet per furlong (with the repeating digit 6) also helps:

${\frac {838\,\mathrm {miles} \times 8{\frac {\mathrm {furlongs} }{\mathrm {mile} }}\times 660{\frac {\mathrm {feet} }{\mathrm {furlong} }}}{8{\frac {\mathrm {feet} }{\mathrm {day} }}}}=838\times 660\,\mathrm {days} =(11110\times (8\times 6)+1100\times (3\times 6))\,\mathrm {days} =553080\,\mathrm {days}$

There are only two multiplications, then some shift operations and addition of six numbers, each of which have only two non-zero digits. Although still impressive, not as impressive as it appears on first sight. Now I wonder, was this coincidence, was the queen a hobby mathematician who knew the tricks or is the story apocryphal? 8 feet per day is slow for a snail; most can cover that distance in less than half an hour. The number 838 could also be tuned. I doubt the distance was know to single mile accuracy and is was probably calculated by summing the lengths of many segments, with some intermediate rounding. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:35, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Charlotte "assembl[ed] a significant library containing volumes on all kinds of intellectual pursuits, she collected natural history specimens and scientific instruments, and employed, funded or corresponded with both male and female scientists, often by means of intermediaries". See Hansen, Mascha (6 July 2022). "Queen Charlotte's scientific collections and natural history networks". Notes and Records. 77 (2). The Royal Society: 323–336. doi:10.1098/rsnr.2021.0070.. DuncanHill (talk) 09:48, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I do not think one would intentionally make the calculation easier when examining the abilities of a renowned calculating prodigy. I would think she'd ask harder questions to see the extent of his calculating prowess. Dreykop (talk) 18:45, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Maybe because she needed to calculate the answer before asking the question, so that she would know if he got it right or not. Alansplodge (talk) 13:04, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

It's like the traditional "Your train leaves Euston at 08.24 and runs north at an average speed of 63 mph. Another train leaves Edinburgh at 10.01 and runs south at 73 mph. Where do they pass each other?" question. You dress up arithmetic in a "realish world" problem to see if your victim examinee can extract the relevant information. Euston, Edinburgh, Land's End, and Ferret Head are all irrelevant. DuncanHill (talk) 21:02, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

I was going to suggest this is a trick question, because Edinburgh is on the East Coast Main Line (London Terminus King's Cross), while Euston serves the West Coast Main Line to Glasgow, so the trains don't pass each other. However, while this was once true, I find on checking that there are now direct services from Euston to Edinburgh. {The poster formerly knowna s 87.81.230.195} 90.193.154.147 (talk) 13:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

selling car with above-water loan

Car is worth about $15K, outstanding loan is about $7K, owner is too cash-poor (and in other debt) to simply pay off the loan to get the title and sell the car. Is there a straightforward way to deal with that through the loan servicer? Find buyer and get some kind of document where the buyer pays the loan servicer and the seller? I have to think this is a standard type of transaction. I'm not the seller but just discussed it with her and am puzzled by the situation. Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:8F01:9261:FCD:4BB9 (talk) 22:20, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Sell the car for the best price, then pay off the remainder of the debt. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 22:26, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

You can't sell the car without the title (official document saying you own the car), which is held by the loan servicer til the loan is paid off. This has to be a very common situation with a standard way to do the necessary juggling, something like escrow for a house sale. That's what I'm asking about. 2601:644:8581:75B0:8F01:9261:FCD:4BB9 (talk) 00:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Essential information for respondents: OP is based in the US (California).  ​‑‑Lambiam 06:40, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Here is a webpage on dealing with this issue: [25]. Some companies will buy a car with an outstanding loan; e.g. [26], [27]. For selling to a private party, perhaps some of the answers given here are also helpful.  ​‑‑Lambiam 06:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. The Reddit thread that Lambiam link helps a bit. 2601:644:8581:75B0:76FA:C1BF:94F4:EDF3 (talk) 02:00, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

May 20

Shopping malls opened in recent years

If you look at the categories of years shopping malls established, why are there very few malls opened and established in United States as of 2010s and 2020s, compared to Asia, where it opened in large numbers? Why is this a case? And why do malls in USA due so quickly while the other malls outside United States are much better thriving? Please use a mindset again please. 2600:387:F:4B16:0:0:0:9 (talk) 05:35, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

What's the statistical basis for your premise? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:41, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

The number of shopping malls in United States, compared to Asia. Also the malls are commonly seen opened in Asia and Europe other than United States. See it here: as of 2020s 2600:387:F:4B16:0:0:0:9 (talk) 07:35, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

No new malls have opened in England for at least ten years, and those we have are struggling to stay afloat. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:57, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

The categories of shopping centres/malls by year only lists shopping centres that have an article and have been categorised by year, which means the the authors of the article know the opening year and took the trouble of adding the right category. That makes the list far from complete. The shopping centre I grew up with, on the outskirts of a provincial town in Western Europe, has no article. Only if you know the biases in the list, you can use it for any statistics. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:57, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

The USA pioneered shopping malls, so will have begun to approach its 'saturation level' (where enough are present and suitable sites have mostly been used) earlier than other countries. Further 'mall demand' will largely be driven only by the country's population (and prosperity) increase, but latterly this will have been countered by the steep rise in online purchases for home delivery, reducing the need for 'bricks and mortar' shopping facilities. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.170.37 (talk) 13:45, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Using North Kansas City as an anecdote: Metro North Mall was a very popular shopping mall. The owner wanted to increase profits. So, the owner kept increasing rent and fees on the businesses until they were ready to leave the mall. While that took place, the owners purchased land a few miles away and began construction on an outdoor mall called Zona Rosa. In other words, Metro Norh is a mall where shoppers are indoors the whole time and Zona Rosa is a mall where shoppers go outside to go from store to store. The owners realized that the rent and fees for a store with external walls and doors all around is significantly higher than the rent and fees for a small parcel inside an indoor mall. Most of the clients in the indoor mall quickly moved to the outdoor mall, leaving the indoor mall abandoned. Now, the original indoor mall has been demolished. The point of this anecdote is that it isn't that the public prefers to walk around outside in Kansas City's blistering summer heat and brutal winter freezes when shopping. It is that the mall owner wants more money and gets more money with an outdoor mall. So, it is expected that there will be less indoor malls for new construction while outdoor malls (not included in the mall counts) are increasing. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 14:08, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Maybe the need for shopping malls has already been fulfilled in the US, or aybe online shopping is having an effect? Alansplodge (talk) 13:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Did you bother to read my reply (and links) above, posted nearly 24 hours before yours? :-) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.170.37 (talk) 19:23, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

It isn't just quantity as well. Consider the Jumbo shopping centre in Vantaa, Finland. 86,100 square meters with 119 shops. Sticking to the Nordic area, consider the Nerstranda mall in Tromso, Norway. 12,000 square meters with 30 shops. Both count as malls, but they are not equal. It will get very complicated very quickly to accurately identify how much mall space and how many stores are opening and closing rather than rounding everythign up to a unit of one mall. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 18:48, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Malls are an endangered species. The numbers of their preferred prey, the brick-and-mortar shopper (Consumerus pedestriani), are declining (curse you Amazon). The mighty herds of yore are no more. According to Capital One Shopping's Mall Closure Statistics, projections indicate the US's estimated 1200 malls (2025) may be down to 900 by 2028, "the number of malls declined 16.7% per year from 2017 to 2022" and that "up to 87% of large shopping malls may close over 10 years". Clarityfiend (talk) 20:50, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

List of largest shopping malls in the United States says the 2nd largest is American Dream Meadowlands which opened 2019 (the same Meadowlands the New York NFL teams play in). Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:47, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

May 21

How come there is no Wikipedia article on the Auckland metropolitan area in New Zealand?

How come there is no Wikipedia article on the Auckland metropolitan area in New Zealand? 2001:569:5022:4400:FDB9:FFA9:1F62:BD0 (talk) 04:10, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Nobody has written it yet. Our 8-odd million articles cover a lot of ground, but there'll always be more stuff that needs being written about. In most of those cases, there'll be someone who says "How come this wasn't written X years ago?". Things happen when they happen, surprisingly enough. This is all done by unpaid volunteers, remember. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:34, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Auckland is about the urban area, and also includes some data for the Auckland Functional urban area, which is larger and which it calls Metro. Auckland Region is about a much larger area but only a modest additional population. Auckland CBD covers the commercial centre of the city. Auckland City covers the local body area prior to 2010. Auckland isthmus covers the same area as Auckland City excluding Hauraki Gulf islands. How does your idea of the Auckland metropolitan area differ from all of these?-Gadfium (talk) 05:47, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

May 22

Website for automatically generating Wikitext citations

I used to use the website https://citer.toolforge.org/citer.fcgi? for generating citations when writing Wikipedia articles. However, it appears that that website is now unavailable. It was a particularly good one. Does anyone know of any similar site that automatically generates Wikipedia text citations? Cerebrality (talk) 01:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

That URL still works for me... Rojomoke (talk) 04:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Its back online for me now, too. Thank you. Cerebrality (talk) 07:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Advanced neurosurgical techniques

As any fan of cartoons or screwball comedies can tell you, the leading cause of amnesia is a clonk on the head and the best method curing it is a second clonk. What medical pioneer developed this technique? I'm sure it was old when Mr Howell tried it on the Skipper in 1965 with a coconut. Matt Deres (talk) 01:49, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

I would guess that information is lost to time. Trepanning was done 10,000 years ago and that's a bit more advanced than a clonk on the head with a coconut. 196.50.199.218 (talk) 04:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Dropped, no doubt, by an overladen African swallow on its way to England. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:11, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

How do you know these things? Are you a king?--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 11:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

I can't resist summarizing this TV commercial I once saw:

Setting: a tropical beach resort.

1. A beautiful woman stands up, adjusts her bikini straps, smiles brightly, and says: "I can't believe this bikini still fits me."
2. Her husband, relaxing in a chair and reading a travel magazine, absentmindedly makes the mistake of agreeing: "Yeah, I can't believe it either."
3. She's dismayed: "What did you say?!"
4. The husband squirms a bit, trying to think of how to recover.
5. Another group of people, nearby, are celebrating something. One of them opens a bottle of champagne. The cork shoots out and up into the top of a palm tree, where it knocks down a coconut— which falls directly on the bikini-wearing wife's head. The husband's jaw drops as he sees.
6. The wife blinks a few times, dazed, and then snaps out of it and remembers what she was doing. She adjusts her bikini straps, smiles brightly, and says: "I can't believe this bikini still fits me."
7. Now primed, the thankful husband replies: "You've... never looked better."
8. She says happily: "Thanks, honey!" and trots off toward the water.
9. He nods and smiles back, and relaxes contemplatively into the chair.
10. Slogan: "Anyone can get lucky."
11. Advertiser: a casino.

--142.112.140.207 (talk) 18:18, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

According to the Neurology article "The head trauma amnesia cure: The making of a medical myth", "The double trauma amnesia plot device appeared in 19th century fiction and was fully formed by the 1880s." Clarityfiend (talk) 05:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

The idea of percussive maintenance is surely much older than that. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 11:49, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

And it extends way beyond bodies. I well remember the days when otherwise sensible, intelligent adults would adopt this technique when the picture on the TV screen started rolling or going haywire. They'd bash the sides of the box, and if it didn't work the first time, they'd bash it harder. Their thinking must have been that this was exactly how the delicate, intricate internal wiring was designed to be fixed. My dad was a civil engineer, and pretty down to earth in any other context. Go figure. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:17, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Well, unlike hitting someone on the head to cure amnesia, hitting an old CRT television sometimes would actually fix a problem. CRT TVs, especially tube-based ones, had a lot of components connected via spring-loaded contacts, which would tend to shift around due to the high amount of heat generated by such components. If a component was slightly mis-seated, percussion could reseat it. I've certainly seen it work numerous times, as have others old enough to remember such devices.[28] CodeTalker (talk) 23:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Great reference - thank you. I can't access the actual article, but that's okay. So, it goes back to at least the 19th century. There's a whiff of sympathetic magic to it as well, so I suppose it could go back a lot further. Matt Deres (talk) 02:32, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Maybe even earlier; the original sinner may have been Xavier Bichat. Quoting from the article:

During the time Gall was in Vienna, French anatomist and physiologist Francois Xavier Bichat (1771–1802) was working in Paris (1794–1802), where he developed his own theories on dual hemispheric functioning without apparent knowledge of Gall. [...] In 1805, Bichat published a comprehensive book Recherches Physiologiques sur la Vie and sur la Mort (Physiological Researches upon Life and Death) in which he argued that the parts of the brain “resemble each other on every side” and “cannot be different in their mode of acting.” While both Bichat and Gall suggested that the 2 halves of the brain have double function, Bichat, unlike Gall, postulated that the cerebral hemispheres are symmetrical and must operate in synchrony.
      With respect to brain damage, Bichat’s symmetrical functioning reasoning led directly to the endorsement of a second trauma cure. He seriously proposed the notion that a second blow could restore the wits of someone who had had a previous concussion. Bichat justified this idea by reasoning that hemispheres that are in balance with each other functioned better, while those out of balance cause perceptual and intellectual confusion.

(The year 1805 is a mistake; this is the year of the posthumous publication of the 3rd edition. The first edition was published in An VII, that is, the year 1799 AD.)

This apparently got married with the idea, already popular in the 19th century, that memories never truly disappear, but, although being inaccessible for conscious recall, persist "somewhere" in the brain.  ​‑‑Lambiam 15:31, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Excellent find - thank you! When I asked the question, I was assuming the answer (if there was one) would be comic; how wonderful to have it involve a fellow whose name is on the Eiffel tower. Matt Deres (talk) 17:26, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Isn't this whole thing a variation on the "hit it with a hammer" solution to fixing things that was so prevalent at the time? When old televisions went on the fritz in the 1970s, you were supposed to hit it with your hand to get it to work. This is also a common trope in lots of different films up to the present day. Recently, I think The Last of Us brought this idea back on the show. In lots of science fiction over the last 50 years, there's usually a small, funny scene where an engineer is trying to get something old or complex to work and when all else fails they smack it really hard in a targeted area and it comes to life. Viriditas (talk) 21:55, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Yep. Black 13 isn't always that lucky. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:59, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

I just remembered; my old mechanic used to temporarily fix failing fuel pumps by giving it one heavy strike with a hammer. Depending on how bad the problem was, the fix would work until you could get yourself a new fuel pump. Viriditas (talk) 00:04, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, after all, the brain is just like an internal combustion engine, really, isn't it. But without the petrol. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:46, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

May 24

Jim Henson's death

His bio says he died from complications related to Group A streptococcal infection at the age of 53 in 1990. Wasn't it unusual to die from this in 1990? How common would it have been? It says he recently traveled from Los Angeles to North Carolina to New York over the space of two weeks while he came down with his initial symptoms. Could he have caught something while traveling? I remember reading that back in 1990, there was little oversight over the health quality of circulated air on board commercial air travel, and HEPA filters didn't become common until much later. It sounds like there was no particle filtration on planes when Henson flew. Could an airplane HEPA filter have saved Henson's life? Although it isn't mentioned in his Wikipedia bio, other sources suggest that Henson was a private tobacco smoker and this might have contributed to his poor health. Viriditas (talk) 21:44, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

It's potentially possible. But as I recall from that sad event, he knew he was sick but didn't want to "bother" anybody with it, and by the time he got around to looking into it, it was too late. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

It's a bit creepy to me, because I was deathly ill just around the same time (I think it was several months before that date) and the doctors couldn't figure out what was wrong with me. I think I had been spending too much time in Tijuana (it was a thing back then) and probably caught some unusual bug. Viriditas (talk) 09:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

The article states that "Infection of GAS may spread through direct contact with mucus or sores on the skin," and "Close contacts of people affected by severe Group A streptococcal infections, defined as those having had prolonged household contact in the week before the onset of illness, may be at increased risk of infection." It doesn't commonly spread through the air, so HEPA filters are unlikely to make a difference. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:57, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm seeing different information. It apparently spreads easily through airborne dispersion in airplanes if you are within 1-2 rows of the carrier. There's a bit more info here.[29] That's from 2015, and there's a lot of unknowns. Viriditas (talk) 11:33, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

May 28

History of sugar confectionery

I'm trying to track down info about "Tavernier's Drup". John Tavernier, the British father of Jules Tavernier was apparently successful with this product as a candy maker, although it isn't clear if he made it in Britain or France, as they lived in both countries. The product is described as "a lump of sugar dyed pink and flavored with banana essence, which proved popular and led to a series of other creative, colorful confections." This is interesting, because apparently banana flavoring in candy had never been done before up to that point, but it isn't clear if Tavernier's father was an innovator or an early adopter of the new flavor.[30] That's about the only info I can find. Artificial banana flavoring was said to have been introduced in the 1850s, which was around the time Tavernier was supposedly making his candy. Anyone know anything else? Viriditas (talk) 10:15, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Not much yet, I thought an advert would turn up easily, but no. The following is from a scientific yearbook for 1854: The various artificial extracts of fruit have been applied to the flavoring of an agreeable species of confectionary known as the “acidulated fruit drops.’ These have been denounced as poisonous by some persons, on the ground that fusel oil is known to produce deleterious effects; and as a natural consequence the confectionary referred to has been discarded. There is, however, no foundation for such statements or belief, and if the confectionary flavored with these extracts has in any case produced injurious effects, it is undoubtedly to be referred to an injudicious consumption of it, and not to any inherent deleterious property.  Card Zero  (talk) 12:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Google shews lots of antique tins, jars, boxes, and adverts for Bonbons John Tavernier, 1 Rue du Cloitre St Merri, Paris. DuncanHill (talk) 12:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

"Drup" is perhaps a slip for "Drop", I've seen him described as "Cet anglais a importé en France les bonbons anglais appelés drops, en forme de quartiers de fruits, de coquillages colorés et parfumés aux essences de fruits" Do we have an article on fruit drops, or pear drops, or acid drops? DuncanHill (talk) 12:24, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Bonbons anglais.— C'est vers 1830 que ce bonbon a été importé en France par un Anglais nommé John Tavernier; plus tard, on a perfectionné les machines qui permettent d'obtenir économiquement ce produit.  Card Zero  (talk) 12:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

In order to really understand where artificial banana flavor comes from, you have to start with artificial pear. Because amyl acetate — produced from fusel oil, a waste product of alcohol distilling, and one of the very first synthetic chemicals used as an artificial flavor -- initially came to prominence as a pear flavoring. Pear drops — barley sugar flavored with amyl acetate diluted in alcohol — were one of the new confections available at the 1851 Crystal Palace exhibition in London. The drops and the chemical used to flavor them drew the attention of August Hofmann, the distinguished chemist who was one of the judges of the exhibition. In a letter to Justus Liebig, his teacher, he noted the "remarkably fruity odor" of amyl acetate ... if you scroll up in my previous link, before "various artificial extracts of fruit", there is a section that ends "Hofmann's letter to Liebig". pear oil is an alcoholic solution of acetate of oxide of amyle, and acetate of oxide of ethyle, prepared from potato fusel oil, (the hydrate of oxide of amyle.)  Card Zero  (talk) 13:30, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone. Based on the above, it looks like the pear drop is a type of Tavernier drop. Also, it’s interesting to see The Crystal Palace come up again as the focal point for the Great Exhibition. No matter what topic I work on, I am inevitably drawn back to those two like a black hole. Viriditas (talk) 20:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

There is a British company called Tavener, but I don't think they are connected. DuncanHill (talk) 20:26, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

That was the original spelling of his name before he changed it, I think. Might be a coincidence. Viriditas (talk) 20:40, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm wrong (and slightly blind) . The original spelling was "Taverner", which somehow morphed into "Tavernier". This information is also suspect because apparently Jules was the source for all of it, so nobody knows what was really true. But some of his obituaries (which were for the most part written by his friends) seemed to suggest that some of it was true. One other interesting thing I recently discovered was how much his friends left out of his obituary and their memoirs. That's where the real "fun" begins. Of course, this isn't the first time I've found some pretty shocking things once you go looking for it. Viriditas (talk) 23:53, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

June 1

Identify this vehicle and camera gear

Photo is by Corwin Short: [31] Date is late January or early February 1937, Louisville, Kentucky. Subject is Margaret Bourke-White who had just arrived in Kentucky after covering the FDR inauguration, so possibly same gear. ChatGPT says the camera is a Graflex Series D or Graflex Super D and the vehicle is a Pontiac, but it's probably just making that up. Viriditas (talk) 02:21, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

The car looks like a number of models did in that time period, complete with rumble seat. You'd probably have to study the details to narrow it down. Google "1937 car with rumble seat" to get help narrow it down. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:29, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

One thing I've learned looking at car photos is that people prefer to showcase the front of the car rather than the rear. That said, the back of the model here looks pretty distinctive, with tail-lights mounted directly on the body and the handle for the rumble seat at the top rather than the bottom. None of the images I found, matched closely. See first gallery second gallery. The camera doesn't look like a Graflex series D to me, but I can't really see much detail. Our article says that the Super D wasn't released until '41. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:03, 1 June 2025 (UTC)