Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/H

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

January 16

Can I seek Chapter 15 protection while a case is ongoing in my home country or after it finished ?

Simple question. I don’t have Us citizenship, but I owe a large debt amount in New York that can’t legally exist in my home country where I currently live (at least where the 50% interest represent usury even for a factoring contract).

My contract only states that disputes should be discussed within a specific Manhattan court, it doesn’t talk about which is the applicable law beside the fact that French law states that French consumer law applies if a contract is signed if the client live in France (and the contract indeed mention my French address). This was something my creditors were unaware of (along with the fact it needs to be redacted in French to have legal force in such a case), but at that time I was needing legal protection after my first felony, and I would had failed to prove partilly non guilty if I did not got the money on time. I can repay what I borrowed with all my other debts but not the ~$35000 in interest.

Can I use Chapter 15 to redirect in part my creditors to a bankruptcy proceeding in France or is it possible to file for Chapter 15 only once a proceeding is finished ? Can I use it as an individiual or is Chapter 15 only for businesses ? 2A01:E0A:401:A7C0:6CE2:1F60:AD30:6C2F (talk) 09:13, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We don't answer questions like that here. You should engage a lawyer. --Viennese Waltz 09:23, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chapter 15 bankruptcy does cover individuals and does include processes for people who are foreign citizens. The basics. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 11:24, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 17

Raymond Smullyan and Ayn Rand

Did Raymond Smullyan ever directly discuss or mention Ayn Rand or Objectivism? I think he might have indirectly referenced her philosophy in a a fictional symposium on truthfulness where a speaker says that he(or she) is not as "fanatical" about being as selfish as possible as an earlier speaker who said he himself was a selfish bastard.Rich (talk) 02:23, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess not. Smullyan wrote so much that it is difficult to assert with certainty that he never did, but it has been pointed out by others that his Taoist philosophical stance is incompatible with Rand's Objectivism.^[1] --Lambiam 12:23, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 18

"The Narrow Way" issued to prisoners in 1916

In his book 112 Days Hard Labour, about prison life in England in 1916, the Quaker Hubert Peet says:

On entry one is given a Bible, Prayer Book, and Hymn Book. In the ordinary way these would be supplemented by a curious little manual of devotion entitled “The Narrow Way,” but at the Scrubs Quakers were mercifully allowed in its place the Fellowship Hymn Book and the Friends’ Book of Discipline.

What was this book The Narrow Way?

I thought the question would be easy to answer if the book was standard issue, but I haven't found anything. (Yes, I'm aware that the title is a reference to Matthew 7:14.) Marnanel (talk) 03:46, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Letters of a Prisoner for Conscience Sake - Page 54 (Corder Catchpool · 1941, via Google books) says "The Narrow Way , you must know , is as much a prison institution as green flannel underclothing ( awfu ' kitly , as Wee Macgregor would say ) , beans and fat bacon , superannuated “ duster " -pocket - handkerchiefs , suet pudding ... and many other truly remarkable things !" so it does seem to have been standard issue. TSventon (talk) 04:22, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Google Books finds innumerable publishers' adverts for The Narrow Way, Being a Complete Manual of Devotion, with a Guide to Confirmation and Holy Communion, compiled by E.B. Here's one. Many of them, of widely varying date, claim that the print run is in its two hundred and forty-fifth thousand. Here it's claimed that it was first published c. 1869, and Oxford University Libraries have a copy of a new edition from as late as 1942. Apart from that, I agree, it's remarkably difficult to find anything about it. --Antiquary (talk) 12:13, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can buy one on eBay for £5.99. Alansplodge (talk) 15:30, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well found! I have shelled out £5.99 in the cause of scholarship (or something). Marnanel (talk) 22:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fun fact: a copy of The Narrow Way figures in A. A. Milne's novel The Red House Mystery. —Tamfang (talk) 22:26, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 19

Federal death penalty

Is there a list of federal criminal cases where the federal government sought the death penalty but the jury sentenced the defendant to life in prison instead? I know Sayfullo Saipov's case is one, but I'm unsure of any others. wizzito | say hello! 01:41, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Official portraits of Donald Trump's first presidency

*grim*

*grin*

Commons category Official portraits of Donald Trump (First presidency) only contains variations of the portrait with Donald Trump smiling. But Photographs of the official portrait of Donald Trump only contains photos incorporating Trump's official portrait with a vigorous facial expression, which is otherwise not even included in Commons?! This seems inconsistent - what is the background and status of either photo? --KnightMove (talk) 10:51, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The framed portraits hanging on the wall in these photos are an official portrait from December 15, 2016, of the then president-elect.^[2] The one with bared teeth is from October 6, 2017, when Trump was in office.^[3] For two more recent official mug shots, look here. --Lambiam 12:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you. Do you know why the president-elect photo is not even uploaded in Commons? Shouldn't it be included in commons:Category:Official portraits of Donald Trump (First presidency)? --KnightMove (talk) 16:00, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The most plausible reason that it was not uploaded is that no one missed it. Among those aware of its existence and having the wherewithal to find it on the Web and to upload it to the Commons, no one may have realized it had not already been uploaded. Or they may not have felt a need; there is no shortage of images in the relevant articles.

Strictly speaking, it does not belong in Category:Official portraits of Donald Trump (first presidency), as Trump was not yet president. However, Category:Official portraits of Donald Trump (second presidency) features nothing but lugubrious portraits of the president-reelect. --Lambiam 22:56, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 20

Trattato delle attinie, ed osservazioni sopra alcune di esse viventi nei contorni di Venezia, accompagnate da 21 tavole litografiche del Conte Nicolò Contarin

I am trying to find the illustration’s description from the original source: Trattato delle attinie, ed osservazioni sopra alcune di esse viventi nei contorni di Venezia, accompagnate da 21 tavole litografiche del Conte Nicolò Contarin including species name and description for these sea anemones: https://www.arsvalue.com/it/lotti/541811/contarini-nicolo-bertolucci-1780-1849-trattato-delle-attinie-ed-osservazio . I requested it on the resource request page but was not able to find where in the source these illustrations are or where their descriptions are. It doesn’t help that I can’t read Italian. KAVEBEAR (talk) 00:11, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you need to locate an occurrence of "(TAV VII)" or "(TAV XII)" in the text. --Askedonty (talk) 12:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) References to the illustration are in the form "tavolo VII" or "tav. VII". So, for example, page 99 refers to fig. 1 e 2. The text refers to the development of the actinae being studied without precise identification, specifically to their sprouting new tentacles, not being (contra Spix) a prolongation of the skin of the base, but from parts of the body. The same page has a reference to fig. 3. --Lambiam 12:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry where are you seeing this page 99 you are referring to? KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:47, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I forgot to link. It is here (and also here). --Lambiam 22:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pu Yi

Although member of the Chinese Communist Party, the last Emperor was an anti-communist and counter-revolutionnair until his death? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.179.151 (talk) 17:26, 20 January 2025 (UTC)Block evasion. Dekimasuよ! 18:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine that during the Cultural Revolution, it was wise to keep one's opinions to one's self. Alansplodge (talk) 17:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jiang Qing did apparently not get the memo. --Lambiam 22:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Situational strength can give psychological pressure on the individual and affect his or her behaviours. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:38, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 21

text of executive order

Hi. On 2025-01-20, POTUS signed an executive order titled "Ending Birthright Citizenship for Children of Illegal Immigrants"[4]. This event has been reported by virtually every major news outlet in the world.

It is now 2025-01-20 9PM Washington time, and I have been trying to find the exact text, or even portions of its text, for a while now, to no avail.

1. Is the full text of this executive order available to the general public?

This Library of Congress site[5] claims that: "All Executive Orders and Proclamations issued after March 1936 are required by law to be published in the Federal Register."

2. Assuming that the above claim is true, is there any requirement or guideline on how quickly an EO is published after it has been signed by POTUS? Epideurus (talk) 02:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. The full text was posted[6] some time around 2025-01-20 8:45PM Washington time. None of the news agencies reporting before that got the title right, so I'm guessing that the title of the EO was only released when its full text was released. Epideurus (talk) 02:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I read the order literally, it implies that persons to which birthright citizenship is denied by force of Section 2 (a) of the order can also not be naturalized at a later date (or, if they can, no department or agency of the United States government shall issue documents recognizing the acquired citizenship). --Lambiam 10:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deadline for ratification of amendments to the US constitution

Hello, and thank you for this opportunity to ask the experts. There's been talk recently about the proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the US constitution after former president Biden stated the he considered the amendment to be ratified and part of the US constitution, as it had been ratified by 38 states, reaching the bar of three quarters of the states the Article 5 of the US constitution sets.

The National Archives disagreed and pointed to a deadline (later extended) for ratification set by Congress; since the required number of states had not been reached by the final deadline and since the deadline had not been extended further, it said, the amendment could not be considered ratified.

This appears to be plainly at odds with the text of Article Five of the United States Constitution, which contains no mention of Congress being able to impose a deadline, or in fact any other requirement, for the ratification process. The best argument I've seen in non-scholarly sources is, in essence, that "the 5th Amendment is silent on this", but that strikes me as unconvincing. The 5th prescribes a process, and there is no reason (that is readily apparent to me) to presume that this process may be changed by Congress in either direction. Just like Congress may not declare that ratification by one half of the states (rather than three quarters) is sufficient, it may not impose that additional steps must be taken or additional hurdles passed: say, it may not require that four fifths of the states must ratify and that three quarters is not enough. The Constitution prescribes what conditions are necessary for an Amendment to become part of the Constitution — but it also dictates that when these conditions are met, this does happen.

As such I find the National Archives' position to be inconsistent with the Constitution and the 5th, and Congress's attempt to impose an additional requirement in the form of a deadline strikes me as out of line with the Constitution, rendering said additional requirement null and void.

That said, and this is where my question comes in, I am not a legal expert. I haven't studied law, nor do I work in or with law in any way; I am merely curious. And although appeals to authority are fallacious as far as logical reasoning is concerned, I don't doubt that the National Archives (as well as, presumably, Congressional staff) have considered this matter and concluded that yes, a) the imposition of a deadline by Congress, above and beyond the process prescribed by the 5th, is constitutional; b) meeting of said deadline is then an additional condition for ratification; and c) since this deadline has not been met here, the ERA is not part of the Constitution.

And my question is: why? On what legal basis? Surely Congress cannot create additional requirements out of whole cloth; there must be some form of authorization in it. What's more, since we are talking about a process prescribed by the Constitution itself, said authority must itself be grounded in the Constitution, rather than taking the form of e.g. a simple law (Congress cannot arbitrarily empower itself to change the rules and processes laid down by the Constitution).

I would be very grateful if someone with a background in law (professional or otherwise) could explain this to me. Thank you very much! 2003:D5:AF0E:DE00:95C4:DF2F:3B13:850E (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I ain't no lawyer, but as I recall, the deadline was stated within the amendment proposal itself. That was the case with a few other amendments also, but they were ratified within the time limit, so there was no issue. It's possible someone will take this issue to court, and ultimately the Supreme Court would have to decide if that type of clause is valid. On the flip side, there is the most recent amendment, which prohibits Congress from giving itself a raise without an intervening election of Representatives. That one was in the wind for like 200 years, lacking a deadline. When it was finally ratified, it stood. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:31, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your reply, much appreciated! I didn't know the deadline was in the proposal itself. I'm not sure I'm convinced that this should make a difference, since for as long as the proposed Amendment is no part of the Constitution, it really is not part of the Constitution and should not be able to inform or affect other provisions of the Constitution. That said I of course agree that it would take the Supreme Court to decide the issue for good. Thanks again! 2003:D5:AF0E:DE00:C4C7:395C:56A3:A782 (talk) 16:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The SCOTUS may be quite busy with executive orders for a while. Quite possible, that the President has to appoint another 6 or 12 judges to cope with all that work load. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 18:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The courts in general views these things as political questions. Abductive (reasoning) 21:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The deadline for the ERA was mentioned in a resolving clause before the text of the amendment itself. In other cases, such as the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the deadline was contained in the amendment itself. Whether this makes any practical difference is a question for the courts. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 13:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why it is the National Archives rather than a legal/constitutional authority such as the Supreme Court that gets to decide whether a proposed amendment has become ratified or not, ie. become law or not. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is the Executive, in this case the National Archives, doing what the Chief Executive ordered them to do. And there is Congress, which set the rules. This sounds like a political question. Abductive (reasoning) 21:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By a statute that took effect in 1984, the task of certifying ratifications of amendments to the US Constitution has been given to the Archivist of the United States, which is why the interpretation of the National Archives (that is, the Archivist) matters. One might argue that this statute is unconstitutional, as the Constitution does not include a provision requiring certification for ratification to take effect, unlike for other federal processes that depend on the outcomes from the several states. AFAIK the constitutionality of the statute, or any of its predecessors (like this one) has never been challenged in court. --Lambiam 10:15, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thank you, Lambiam. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But of course there must always be some form of official certification. That would be the case for any law passed to a state governor or the president for signing, just as it must be for a constitutional change. Otherwise, anyone could claim that a proposed constitutional amendment has been ratified by a sufficient number of states and must now become part of the law of the USA. Surely the system depends on not just anyone claiming this, but a properly constituted authority with the legal power/responsibility to make such a certification. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note that there was no certification procedure for the original ratification of the United States Constitution; actually, the amendment provision of the Articles of Confederation, which required unanimous approval of the states, was bypassed. I don't think there was already one in place for the Bill of Rights either – when Congress met on on January 18, 1792, the President simply informed them that he had "a copy of an exemplified copy of an Act of the Legislature of Vermont, ratifying" the amendements,^[7] which implied a sufficient number of instruments of ratification had been received. The procedure for the ratification of the electoral votes in presidential elections was only specified in the Twelfth Amendment; the 1796 United States presidential election managed to do without. I agree, though, that there ought to be an official procedure for the ratification of constitutional amendments, but is the ability of Congress to inspect . The question is, is Congress passing (by simple majorities) a bill that such and such procedure shall be it, which is then signed into law by the President, enough to make it official and binding?

The US Constitution does not define who is "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. At the moment this is a hot issue. If Congress passes a bill, next signed into law, declaring that the definition is made by executive order, is the issue thereby settled? --Lambiam 16:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not settled until the Supreme Court says it is. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:03, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the text:

"Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to CH. J. Res. 208] equal rights for men and women.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled {two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission by the Congress:" DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 01:05, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 22

Sir John Simon's soul

"Simon has sat on the fence so long that the iron has entered into his soul" is a quotation attributed to David Lloyd George. I have been unable to come up with a definitive source, and neither Roy Jenkins (in The Chancellors), nor Duncan Brack (in The Dictionary of Liberal Quotations) have been able to either. Can the RefDeskers do better? Thank you. I felt sure I'd asked this here before, but I cannot find any trace of it in the archives. DuncanHill (talk) 18:49, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I looked into this question a while ago. The earliest evidence I could find came from a diary entry by Sir George Riddell for 14th December 1912:

The other day F. E. Smith told me a good story of a member who, when speaking in the House of Commons, remarked, "Mr. So-and-So has sat for so long on the fence that the iron has entered into his soul".

It's here. Shame that no-one's named. --Antiquary (talk) 20:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Both parties were named by Konni Zilliacus in 1935. Google Books also claims to have it in a version naming Lloyd George and Simon in a 1931 number of the New Statesman, but I find their dating of "Snippet view" periodicals unreliable. --Antiquary (talk) 21:03, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found a 1922 case of "Who was it who said of a Free Church leader: "he has sat on the fence so long that the iron has entered into his soul"?". DuncanHill (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! The Spring 1905 number of Forest Leaves magazine (here at vol. II, no. 2, p. 16) gives us this: "Winston Churchill said that Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman 'had sat so long on the fence that the iron had entered into his soul.'" A rare example, then, of Churchillian Drift in reverse. --Antiquary (talk) 08:11, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One more Google search tells us that Churchill said this at a meeting of the Bow and Bromley Conservative Association in, apparently, April 1905. --Antiquary (talk) 10:04, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well done! I'd always rather associated it with Manchuria. Lloyd George does have a certain gravitational pull for put-downs. I can't quite see him actually nicking one of Churchill's, and I think he would not want to associate himself, even indirectly, with such a negative comment about CB. I'm reminded by Jeeves and the Yule-tide Spirit that it is an echo of Psalm 105:18 in the Prayer Book. If I were Lawrence Frances Flick I would be VERY careful about the choice of type-face for my bookmarks DuncanHill (talk) 10:58, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found the Forest Leaves version (with a couple more from the column) in The Mail (Dublin) 4 January 1905. Interestingly, there was an article in lots of local papers in January 1905 which mention the iron entering Lloyd George's soul as a result of how power is abused in the hands of an ascendant Church. DuncanHill (talk) 11:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Got a link to the Mail version? --Antiquary (talk) 11:31, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) The Belfast Telegraph - Thursday 23 May 1907 says that Mr Churchill made the dig at CB "at Bow, February 19, 1902". Dublin Mail 4 Jan 1905 Column called "Mixed Metaphors" DuncanHill (talk) 11:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The "iron entered his/my/our soul(s)" trope seems very common at the time, usually of course in a more positive sense. DuncanHill (talk) 11:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And here is a report of Churchill addressing the Annual Meeting of the Bow and Bromley Conservative Association from the Derby Daily Telegraph Thursday 20 February 1902 Mr. Winston Churchill and the War. DuncanHill (talk) 11:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The report appears in many local papers. The report in the Westminster Gazette says CB has NOT (my emphasis) sat so long on the fence that the iron has entered his soul. DuncanHill (talk)

If you have access to a copy it might be worth taking a look at the eight-volume Winston S. Churchill: His Complete Speeches, 1897-1963, edited by Robert Rhodes James. --Antiquary (talk) 14:14, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not in Volume I, where it should be. DuncanHill (talk) 18:11, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The anecdote is told in a Lloyd George–John Simon version on page 472 of The New Statesman and Nation issue of October 17, 1931:

Sir John Simon's acidity of temperament and capacity for being a little in several camps but beloved by none led his late chief to remark—or so I'm told—that "Sir John has sat so long on the fence, that the iron has entered into his soul." Critic.^[8]

Here one can verify, in spite of the snippetness of the permitted views, that this indeed the issue of this date. So it is indeed true that Lloyd George "is said" (or, more precisely, "has been said") to have commented this – although using a slightly different word order and punctuation than the quotation in our article. It is, of course, by no means sure that he actually has done so. --Lambiam 14:55, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is on Archive.org. It is Volume II Number 34, despite what Google claims. DuncanHill (talk) 18:04, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, the Churchill/Campbell-Bannerman version was still being quoted as "famous" as late as 1950, so the two variants co-existed for many years. --Antiquary (talk) 17:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 23

Marco Guidetti

Who was Marco Guidetti in relation to De Tomaso Pantera? This Turbo wrapper says "Marco Guidetti Pentera de Tomaso", but my search didn't yield any meaningful results for him, including books. My guess he could be this one, but not sure. Brandmeister^talk 10:45, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The creator(s) of these Turbo wrappers misspelled "Pantera", so they were not overly careful. Perhaps they misinterpreted the name of the author of the photograph as being the name of the car model. --Lambiam 15:26, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One possibility is that the particular vehicle shown was owned by a Marco Guidetti, possibly the movie designer and art director of that name who worked on Mad Max and other films: IMDb link (unreliable source) here. Relatedly, he may instead have been involved in designing the model's styling. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.8.29.20 (talk) 15:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Marco Guidetti is credited to authoring and photographing Valentino Rossi : campione and a Marco Guidetti also authored JAGUAR . So it appears likely it is the name of the photographer as suggested by Lambiam when the gum was recently reintroduced, although this doesn't rule out the alternative possibilities that they are the car's owner or its designer as suggested by The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195. Modocc (talk) 16:59, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We also haven't yet ruled out the author/photographer/car designer(?) and the film designer being the same person, although the car originated around 1970 and film guy's career seems to have started around 2003. Of course, 'Marco Guidetti' cannot be that uncommon a name in Italy. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.8.29.20 (talk) 19:42, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probable photo, and eulogy of author/photographer Marco Guidetti: The photographer who was.. --Askedonty (talk) 10:40, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, still something anyway. Brandmeister^talk 11:08, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Antarctic Territory population

What was the population of the Australian Antarctic Territory in the 2021 Australian census? I assumed this would easily be discoverable with a Google search, but I couldn't find this information from the ABS. Since the census counts people where they are on census night (and not where they live permanently), since Davis Station is inhabited year-round, and since the AAT is considered an external territory of Australia, the AAT should have been covered by the census (comparable to Christmas Island, the Cocos, etc) and should have had a non-zero population on census night. Nyttend (talk) 19:46, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The external territories are listed here: [9]. Quoting our article "Australia is an original signatory to the Antarctic Treaty of 1959. Under section 4, all territorial claims are held in abeyance." Which would appear to explain why it's not listed. Modocc (talk) 20:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Expeditioners to Australian bases in the Australian Antarctic Territory (and other locations) are included in the Census. Their 'place of enumeration' is an Offshore Statistical Area Level 1 (SA1) in Tasmania." [10] -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:45, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, that's interesting. I wonder what it is? I went to https://maps.abs.gov.au (which gives you information on an SA1-level) and ran a search for "Antarctic", and there were two called "Antarctic Circle" and "New Antarctica", but they're in southeastern Brisbane and near the Sydney CBD :-\ Nyttend (talk) 03:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Antarctica is a 2-story terraced suburban home at 19 Lodge Street, Forest Lodge, New South Wales [11]. When I was there the word "terraced" was not used (although that might be a WA idiosyncracy). It would possibly have been described as a "duplex", although I could never get my head around the word. Antarctic Circle is on an industrial estate on Logan Road, Underhill, Brisbane. 2A02:C7C:F33B:4100:971:8BD8:F20F:648C (talk) 18:52, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Explain meme?

[12] I understand what the person is trying to imply about Elon Musk, but I don't understand what the second picture is getting at. Is that Prince Harry and is that relevant? I'm pretty clueless so be patient. Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:512B (talk) 23:22, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Hemsworth. The second image is a reverse angle showing the listener's response, and the meme is all about a good example of a facial expression expressing doubt. Originally the response by the listener was "is he though?". See [13]. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 00:12, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah thanks, I'm not sure I wanted to know that the Mighty Thor looks like that now. 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:512B (talk) 08:14, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's a bit cultural. I taught at the high school Chris Hemsworth attended, and picked that look instantly. HiLo48 (talk) 09:57, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like now? It's from a movie that came out in 2017... Matt Deres (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As to the resemblance between Charlie Chaplin and another moustached man, see the 1940 movie The Great Dictator (for example, see this image). --142.112.149.206 (talk) 03:29, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Curiously, those two men were born only 4 days apart, in April 1889. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:44, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For added context, it's a scene from Thor: Ragnarok. TvTropes link: [14]. --Slowking Man (talk) 02:44, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 24

In which place, first-cousin-once-removed marriage is not allowed?

In which place, first-cousin-once-removed marriage is not allowed? 220.132.216.52 (talk) 06:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's cousin marriage article will answer your question. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:37, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 25

Proclamation of the People's Republic of China

Can anyone show me the name of all people in the image please? Except Mao Zedong ThomasDracoLucitor (talk) 00:05, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first on the (radical) left could be Liu Shaoqi, beside him is Li Lisan, and Lin Boqu's article says he's the one standing behind Mao. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:06, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And the guy to Mao's (reactionary) right just might be Sir Not-Quite-Appearing-in-this-Picture. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:18, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The guy in back between Lin Boqu and the Great Steersman: ~~Ye Jianying~~ Lin Biao (from this YouTube video at the 51 second mark)? The guy to his right: Peng Dehuai? Clarityfiend (talk) 03:27, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also somewhere in this picture, Wa Li, aka Wal Do. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The bearded gent on the far right looks like Shen Junru. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:01, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The obscured guy behind the paper Mao is holding may be Zhu De, looking at a photo shot from a different spot. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:12, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Founding Ceremony of the Nation may be of interest. DuncanHill (talk) 10:42, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This page and this page have several photos of the same event taken from different angles, affording clearer views of some of the attendees. --Lambiam 13:29, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thrax in Rome?

According to our article Maximinus Thrax, he never entered Rome during his imperial reign. Had he ever been to Rome before his accession? Or did he never set foot in Rome itself during his life? —Amble (talk) 20:11, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Answering my own question: the Historia Augusta says that Maximinus went to Rome to present himself to Alexander Severus after the death of Elagabalus: [15]. —-Amble (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Though, as our article on Maximinus Thrax rightly says, the Historia Augusta is "notoriously unreliable". The translator of the Penguin Classics version left out the lives of Maximinus Thrax and of all other emperors after Elagabulus on the grounds that in that half of the Historia "fiction predominates". The 3rd century is an ill-documented period of Roman history and I doubt if you'll find an answer to your question in reliable sources. --Antiquary (talk) 09:19, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, understood that the available sources are unreliable. Given that, I’m satisfied with an in-universe answer. —Amble (talk) 16:53, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thrax was enlisted by Severus as imperial bodyguard ref So it was likely he saw Rome prior to his accession The AP (talk) 10:52, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The site you've linked to tells me that that ebook is unavailable in my country. What's the author's source for the statement that MT was an imperial bodyguard to Severus? --Antiquary (talk) 11:59, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably Historia Augusta, but I would need to check. The AP (talk) 16:17, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, yes, his service under Septimius Severus seems to be while on campaign, and I don’t see it mentioned that Severus brought Thrax back to Rome. But he does put in an appearance at Rome later in the narrative, at least. It would be interesting if any of the barracks emperors are not described as having been in Rome at any point. Although the available sources are unreliable, it would say something about how they were viewed in relation to the city itself. --Amble (talk) 16:53, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 26

Liam, Elie Wiesel

According to https://hebrewnamer.com/names/liam/ "the name Liam was also the pseudonym of the famous Jewish author and Holocaust survivor, Elie Wiesel, when he first began writing". Is this mentioned elsewhere? Mcljlm (talk) 23:09, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find any source confirming this. Pseudonyms known to have been used by Wiesel are "Ben Shlomo", his first pseudonym,^[16] and "Elisha Carmeli".^[17] --Lambiam 09:19, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 27

Contacting Jimmy Wales

wp:deny

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

What are all of the ways for one to contact Jimmy Wales? There's a specific e-mail address for him and I used it but so far I don't think that he has ever actually responded to my e-mail. 172.56.182.234 (talk) 02:11, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's no guarantee whatsoever he'll reply, but one place to leave a public message is https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Unprotected ... -- AnonMoos (talk) 05:00, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merci beaucoup! 172.56.182.234 (talk) 06:01, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Juntas in North Africa

How come almost every country along the band stretching from Guinea to Sudan is either a military dictatorship or was one very recently? Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 07:04, 27 January 2025 (UTC) [reply]

wp:deny

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

Sub-Saharan Africa does not have a rich tradition of democracy. Where democracy is more entrenched, backsliding is harder (though not impossible--January 6 comes to mind, as do the attempts to overturn the 2020 election), but where it isn't entrenched, it's easy for new dictatorships to replace old ones, or for short-lived democracies to be replaced by new dictatorships. Like in Germany in 1933 or in Russia in 1917. 172.56.182.234 (talk) 07:10, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why are they military dictatorships specifically, as opposed to other forms of dictatorship? Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 09:04, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Someone who's wrong on the internet, that area is known as the Sahel. We don't seem to have an article on it, but a web search for Sahel and politics and/or your more specific terms of choice will provide a lot of information. CMD (talk) 07:37, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We do have an article on it, Coup Belt, which has a bit of information. 115.188.138.105 (talk) 09:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, good find. Unfortunately short. CMD (talk) 13:13, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know these men?

Today's "Picture of the Day" shews US Secretary of State William P. Rogers signing the Paris Peace Accords, 27 January 1973, at the Hotel Majestic. But who else is in the picture? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 22:09, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"William J. Porter, the new Deputy Undersecretary of State who had been the United States delegate to the semi-public talks until this month, flew to Paris with Mr Rogers and sat at the table with him. Heywood Isham, acting head of the United States delegation, Marshall Green, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, and William H. Sullivan, Mr Green’s deputy, who has been leading technical talks with the North Vietnamese here, completed the American group at the table." [18] --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 04:30, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(this was from a Google search for US Secretary of State William Rogers Signing the Paris Peace Accords.) --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 04:37, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, so seated at the table, from left to right, 1) William H. Sullivan, 2) William J. Porter, 3) William P. Rogers, 4) not sure, I think Marshall Green, 5) not sure. None of them look bald enough to be Heyward Isham who you can see here. I'd like to know who the two men standing behind them are. The one on our right appears to be wearing some kind of chain of office. DuncanHill (talk) 11:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, somewhere on this search I found a mention of him as an usher. Note the white gloves. Here's a few more pictures of the event. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 28

Clarence O. Sherrill

(I don't know if this belongs here or at WP:RSN) I just finished writing this article and his role as a lieutenant colonel is mentioned in many sources. His gravestone at Arlington National Cemetery lists his rank as brigadier general. I can't find anything about him being promoted to that, especially since he left the military in 1926 as a lieutenant colonel. Should I just stick with that title? I'm amazed if the most prominent US military cemetery didn't confirm this when he was buried. APK hi :-) (talk) 07:23, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here he is named as "Lt. Colonel Clarence O. Sherrill" when he retired from the army in 1925. I can find that he was promoted to colonel,^[19] which rank he was holding as of 1934.^[20] --Lambiam 09:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arlington cemetery: Mistakes may affect 64,000 graves. Abductive (reasoning) 16:03, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also Colonel (United States)#Honorary colonels, which might explain why he was promoted after retirement. Alansplodge (talk) 17:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is also common for retiring officers to be promoted on their last day, to bump up their pensions. Abductive (reasoning) 17:47, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. APK hi :-) (talk) 17:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orwell quotations

Of the Orwell Institute, The Orwell Foundation and The Orwell Society which would be the best to ask about the authenticity of Orwell quotes? Is there another organisation which might be better? Mcljlm (talk) 18:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a quotation from "Animal ~~House~~ Farm" or 1984 then Google searching would be far quicker. We also have https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Orwell ... AnonMoos (talk) 20:59, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Animal Farm, perhaps? In my experience, Google searching for quote authentication has to be done intelligently. Misattribution of quotes has become the thing the internet and social media does best, so there's a lot of misattributed rubbish out there (and there's a select group of people who seem to get most of the undeserved credit: Oscar Wilde, Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Mark Twain, Will Rogers ...). Most sites just parrot what other sites say, without any form of independent checking. Wikiquote can be trusted. So can Quote Investigator. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JackofOz mentions the problematics of Google searching. Wikiquote and QI are more reliable but not as authoritative as an organisation concerned with specifically with Orwell. Two of those I mentioned are in England, the other in the USA. Should I mail all of them? Mcljlm (talk) 23:18, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you're interested in quotes from "Animal Farm" or 1984 you can do what are basically searches of the e-texts of those books... AnonMoos (talk) 17:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was George "Giraffe" Orwell (not Bluto) who said, "Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" Clarityfiend (talk) 11:11, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Several books of quotations state the sources of the quotations, making them verifiable: [21], [22], [23]. --Lambiam 11:34, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I find the service here is rather good. DuncanHill (talk) 22:21, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where is "here"? Mcljlm (talk) 04:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He's saying that if you want to find out whether an Orwell quote is authentic, you should ask about it on this reference desk. --Viennese Waltz 11:19, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is the origin of the name Curé and Ouro for Kure Atoll? Was there an island west of Kure?

There was two discussions in this area a couple years ago: Kure names )(the previous day this discussion Islands northwest of Midway). I noticed one of the names discussed on an old map, and added to that discussion, but the help desk suggested I ask a new question, so here it is. What is the origin of the name found on this map: 1855 map listing a Curé island west of Pearl and Hermes. It also has "it" as Ouro, which is Portuguese for Gold. The second part of the question, is it possible there was an island west of Kure, that corresponds to something like the Hancock Seamount (northwest of kure) but has since collapsed into the sea but several hundred years ago might of been there? I find it odd so many islands were found west of Kure Atoll, and there is a clear mechanism they could be submerged is Kure is the farthest north coral atoll, beyond this the corals would likely die and stop the island growing. Secondly, the sea level has risen in the last centuries. Were they simply a midentification Kure, midway, etc.? Thanks in advance. A75 (talk) 21:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What a fun question that was. I think there is a very good case to make that the atoll was sighted by Nantucket whalers on or after 1820 and named Cure's, Curé, or Cure. Our "Russian navigator Kure" possibly invented by the Hawaiian Advisory Committee to the U.S. Board on Geographic Names. Can list the sources again but it is really guesswork.

Since renaming geographic features is news these days let's move the article to Papapa. The Kingdom of Hawaii annexed it in 1886 and built a structure for the aid of mariners in distress. That should give priority to the name. fiveby(zero) 02:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that most of the islands found west of Kure Atoll are probably phantom islands e.g the "Byera" on the map probably corresponds to Byers's Island, many probably came from Benjamin Morrell who was notorious at making up things. 115.188.138.105 (talk) 23:50, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Progum and Kent

Allegedly, PowerGum, a trademark of Turkish company Progum, bought the trademark rights for Turbo chewing gum from its original manufacturer, Kent (in 2013, per some sources). Progum's entry on Turbo doesn't confirm that, but shows PowerGum as a registered trademark symbol. Is there some online database or other official source confirming PowerGum / Progum's purchase of rights from Kent? For the record, such Turbo is produced under PowerGum mark with Progum stated as manufacturer, according to package that I have. Brandmeister^talk 22:04, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 29

Name of the phenomena

What is the name of the phenomena where the fetish nurse uniform is more accepted by the public as genuine than an actual nurse uniform. Not restricted just to nurse. Where public perception is completely different from the actual reality, like spies looking like James Bond. Ohanian (talk) 06:08, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TV Tropes calls it Reality Is Unrealistic. See also The Coconut Effect, kayfabe.

I love acting. It is so much more real than life.
— Lord Henry Wotton, in Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray

--Slowking Man (talk) 08:25, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 30

Rennie Garden 1862 Act of Parliament

Hello, according to an inscription at Rennie Garden (trying to figure out if it's notable), it states "in 1862 the Corporation of London secured the preservation of this garden, through an Act of Parliament" (can be read here in full). The few sources I've found repeat this claim, without any details. We have List of acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom from 1862, which touts itself as a "complete list". Unfortunately, the City of London is mentioned only once, the Corporation not at all, and the London-related bills seem to be all railways. I suppose it could be a railway bill given the location, but any ideas as to where more information could be found? Thanks, CMD (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've drawn a bit of a blank too. I wonder if the park was preserved somehow through the Land Registry Act 1862? Caveat - I know next to nothing about property law. Alansplodge (talk) 12:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]