Humanities desk
< July 22	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 24 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 23

Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal?

Hi! (I am currently working on Nepal) I am from Nepal and speak the native language but seasoned researchers seem to fare better than me, even without that ability. So, here I am. I remember and can find sources that say Nepal had become a federal democratic republic since such and such events. But I can't find an actual declaration that Nepal's official name would be Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal, henceforth. As such, I thought I should probably remove that claim from the lead sentence. Then, I found out that at least some CIA and UN sources mention that that is the "official name" of Nepal. How do they get that kind of information? Is there any specific kinds of documents that Nepal government issues to, for example, UN, that makes it clear to them that that is in fact Nepal's official name? I only found a letter informing everyone that Nepal was now friends with Angola or something, but it didn't mention "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal". Or, maybe, I've failed to recover an all too public evidence of such a declaration? Alternatively, how do the official names of other countries come about? Maybe, it happens regularly that everyone accepts that a given country's official name is such and such, without there ever being an official declaration that that would be the case? (This is a valid question to ask here, right?) Thanks! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 08:11, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

the constitution of Nepal should give it its official name. And of course officials write to each other, like, "now please refer to me as ...". This is the way they know the official name, when changed. Gem fr (talk) 10:19, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Constitution says something to the effect of "Nepal will be a secular federal democratic republic state". Doesn't say that will be the name, despite naming stuff like official language, animal, color, etc. I'm guessing you are guessing about the other point? I'd love to see like a letter that ends- "Regards, KP Oli, Prime minister, Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" but can't find one. Letterheads seem to begin "Government of Nepal", which is no help at all. Sad! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 11:28, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

actually art 56 says that, "Structure of the State: (1) The Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal shall have three main levels of structure: federal, provincial and local. (etc.)". So Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal it is. (just had to search republic in the text) Gem fr (talk) 12:52, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Usedtobecool, and if you need a reference from a secondary source (because people sometimes delete stuff if the reference is to a primary source instead), here is one from Himalayan Times: "President Ram Baran Yadav officially declared the promulgation of the ‘Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal’ on September 20..." 70.67.193.176 (talk) 14:58, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yup! Just as expected! Way better than my sorry attempt. Thank you both, a ton each! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 18:51, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Usedtobecool: That newspaper reference concerns the 2015 constitution, but if you are interested in the official name changes, they were in 2006 and 2008. See for example, List of UNESCO member states: "On 4 August 2008 the Permanent Mission of Nepal to the United Nations informed the Organization that the formal name 'Nepal' was replaced by 'the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal'. The formal name 'Kingdom of Nepal' had been replaced by 'Nepal' as of 22 August 2006." Also see ISO 3166-1 Newsletter VI-3 (9 September 2008) in English and French: [1]. Also you can get a 2008 source for the name change by looking up Nepal in The United Nations Terminology Database which should take you to this link: [2]. Mathew5000 (talk) 02:24, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Signorelli parapraxis

In the first section, it says: "Without Trafoi the substitute Boltraffio rhyming to it would be incomprehensible." – However, if I'm not mistaken, "Boltraffio" actually doesn't rhyme with "Trafoi". So does anybody have an idea what exactly is referred to here?--Hildeoc (talk) 11:24, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

why, this is freudian nonsense, so just let it go. Gem fr (talk) 12:54, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hildeoc, "rhyming" is the wrong word - he means "associating", since one syllable of Boltraffio sounds like one syllable of Trafoi. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 14:53, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@70.67.193.176: Hi there and thanks a lot for posting! Following your argumentation, I have know changed the wording accordingly. However, that passage still seems somewhat awkward to me, as it actually does not even mention the name Botticelli – except for the heading –, let alone explain its significance for the claimed chain of association …--Hildeoc (talk) 18:12, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That passage could perhaps stand to be diluted into "what associative processes had linked Signorelli through Botticelli to Boltraffio". Either way, it's supposed to be Swales' interpretation, rather than Freud's (Swales' investigation), so there is still something unclear with that. Well now, we may have become more familiar with stupidly commenting upon foreign toponyms and given names than the average tourist was, back in Sigmund's times. -Askedonty (talk) 06:19, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brigadier general

In this section, the article states: In the Australian Imperial Force during World War I, the rank of brigadier general was always temporary and held only while the officer was posted to a particular task, typically the command of a brigade. […] As in the United Kingdom, the rank was later replaced by brigadier. Hence, prior to 1922, a brigadier general was a general officer; subsequently, brigadiers were not generals […] — Now, the latter passage I don't really get. Why exactly "hence"? Was brigadier general synonymous with brigadier before 1922, or wasn't it? If yes, wouldn't it be much clearer to write Hence, prior to 1922, a brigadier was a general officer (brigadier general) instead?--Hildeoc (talk) 15:01, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an expert, but my reading of this is that before 1922 "Brigadier General" was a temporary rank (essentially a job title) granted to generals in charge of a brigade. That's why it says "Hence, prior to 1922, a brigadier general was a general officer". Changing it to "brigadier" would therefore be incorrect, because that wasn't the title/rank used. After 1922, a new permanent rank of "brigadier" was introduced to replace it, and these brigadiers were not classed as generals. Iapetus (talk) 15:52, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Iapetus: Okay, I see. But then the question remains whether the term brigadier was used already before 1922 in the Australian forces, and if so, what it had meant then, right …?--Hildeoc (talk) 18:00, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Roy J. Snell

Roy J. Snell is a real puzzle. The Goodreads bio is very detailed, but no one can find any information about him anywhere. Maile66 scoured the web, and the reference staff at my local library checked their bio databases and NovelList, both children's and general. He has an entry at sf-encyclopedia.com but it doesn't give anywhere near the level of info of the goodreads bio. I tried to figure out who wrote the goodreads bio, but I think I have to be a "librarian" on there to see that, and I'm not. One of the article's sources lists three sources of its own here but my library doesn't have them and they aren't available for interlibrary loan, either. I'm stumped. There has to be info out there, unless the goodreads bio was written by a family member or something. Can anyone help? --valereee (talk) 15:36, 23 July 2019 (UTC) ETA: Hmmm...this was a previously used source: a college paper; I'm thinking it's the source the goodreads bio used? --valereee (talk) 15:48, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He seems to also have an entry in the Oxford Companion to Crime & Mystery Writing ; if you have an archive.org account you can get on the waitlist to borrow it; or your library may be quicker. Or could your librarian get hold of an older Who's Who for you, c. 1930s? (One other archive.org hit: a brief mention of him giving a geography lecture that refers to him as "well known" and "prolific".) 70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:21, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, 70.67! That's an excellent start! Back I go to my library! --valereee (talk) 16:30, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Fingers crossed they can get those two books! 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:11, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee:, You might ask at Wp:RX. Gleeanon409 (talk) 16:46, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Article: The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation - Bought by Capital One Financial Corporation or Not?

I was doing research on the HSBC credit card. I followed the link to Wikipedia. I had earlier followed these other links which indicated that The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) had been bought by Capital One Financial Corporation:

1) Capital One Financial Corporation (NYSE: COF) announced today a definitive agreement under which Capital One will acquire HSBC's domestic credit card business, including its approximately $30 billion credit card portfolio, for an 8.75 percent premium to par value of all receivables. Capital One to Acquire HSBC Domestic Credit Card Business press.capitalone.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=251626&p=irol-newsArticle&ID...

2) How Capital One buying HSBC credit card accounts affects ... https://www.creditcards.com/...card.../capital-one-hsbc-how-change-affect-customers-... Aug 1, 2011 - How the Capital One-HSBC credit card deal affects consumers ... “Often, a buyer will offer a better deal, more services and features,” Hammer ...

I see nothing in the Wikipedia article file regarding such a corporate deal. I also have not yet seen an article that definitively states that the transaction was completed and the sale finalized.

So far I am stuck and still wondering if the buyout happened or not. I am hoping there are some financial gurus available who can help me determine if the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation was indeed bought by Capital One Financial Corporation or not.

Thank you for any input - I think it is a major event - whether the deal went through or not - and that it should be included in the Wikipedia article.

I apologize if my format is not exactly per the listed terms - will try to learn as I go.

Sincerely, LateEntryLateEntry (talk) 19:42, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

HSBC still exists. They may have sold their credit card division, but not the entire corporation. Blueboar (talk) 19:59, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And not even all the credit card divisions of HSBC, only the one in one single country (presumably the US) "Capital One will acquire HSBC's domestic credit card business". HSBC has credit card divisions in many countries. --Lgriot (talk) 11:37, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Buying "HSBC's domestic credit card business" is very different from acquiring The Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation. DOR (HK) (talk) 15:08, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]