Humanities desk
< December 19	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 21 >

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

December 20

Incorrectly named namespaces

Hello, I hope you don't mind me asking questions here because there is no talk page for the following pages because they belong to the wiki project. I would like to ask if I may why are the following namespaces/pages are named incorrectly:

1.Namespace Name:Thomas FitzMaurice FitzGerald. Correct Name: Thomas Fitzmaurice, Lord OConnello, He was not called FitzGerald.

2.Namespace Name:John FitzGerald, 1st Baron DesmondCorrect Name:John FitzThomas,1st Baron Desmond. He was not called FitzGerald.

3.Namespace Name:James FitzMaurice FitzGerald Correct Name:James Fitzmaurice. He was not called FitzGerald.

Wikipedias own links verify what I am saying above. I can send reference if required.

I see this quite often (Fitzgerald being tagged on to other names) and I think maybe its because the Author wants to show a link to the Fitzgerald Dynasty (The Geraldines) but that is not necessary as the links do that quite well and in fairness his name is Thomas Fitzmaurice.

Thank you for your time and assistance,

Joseph Fitzmaurice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joefitzer (talk • contribs) 00:09, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Joefitzer: All of those articles have talk pages. What do you mean that they don't? RudolfRed (talk) 00:22, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about the project banner. It is not to stop you from starting a discussion. For example, go to Talk:Thomas_FitzMaurice_FitzGerald and click "new section" at the top of the page. RudolfRed (talk) 00:33, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It did not say "FitzMaurice FitzGerald, Thomas" or "FitzGerald, Thomas FitzMaurice" on the passport or birth certificate of Thomas, because such documents had not been invented yet. In fact, there was no frozen notion of a surname in these days; surnames where basically things tagged on to a person's Christian name for the purpose of diambiguation. The prefix "Fitz-" simply meant "son of", so this Thomas was distinguished from other Thomases by identifying him as "Thomas, son of Maurice, son of Gerald". At some points family names were introduced, in which children "inherited" their father's name, and then often some such variable tag was chosen to become the frozen surname. Ella Fitzgerald was not the son of any Gerald, just like Amy Jo Johnson was not the son of some John – but one of her ancestors was and turned the tag into a surname. --Lambiam 11:50, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is "How do the preponderance of modern reliable sources refer to these people". That's how to answer the question. --Jayron 32 12:19, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Court rulings that requiring college credits for entry to police academy are unconstitutional

Have state courts in Nevada, or in the federal judicial district that includes Nevada, ever ruled that requiring college credits or a college degree as a prerequisite for applying to a police or sheriff's academy is unconstitutional because it discriminates against minorities or imposes an undue burden on the poor? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:8B60:8EE0:F52A:5E6A:C2F4:5E0A (talk) 00:59, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's exceptionally unlikely that there's case law that exactly fits your parameters. In any event, while your question is not asked in terms of requesting legal advice, it's specific enough and a niche enough area of legal practice that I would strongly advise you seek a licensed attorney's input. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 01:23, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That, and possibly also ask it on a legal forum and/or in a legal-related Reddit subreddit. Futurist110 (talk) 01:42, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the same reason that we do not give legal advice here, it is not wise to seek legal advice from a forum where every Tom, Dick and Harry can spout their uninformed opinions without restraint while presenting themselves as legal eagles. --Lambiam 11:14, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But plenty of people go to such forums for legal advice; are they all idiots? This might not be an alternative to talking to an actual lawyer, but rather a nice and useful addition to this. Futurist110 (talk) 23:24, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The largest ports in Austria-Hungary

What were the largest ports in Austria-Hungary? Obviously there was Trieste and Fiume and Zadar and Dubrovnik, but which other large ports did Austria-Hungary have, if any? Futurist110 (talk) 04:54, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's also Pula, apparently. Futurist110 (talk) 04:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Budapest~~Budapest and/or Vienna, apparently Vienna, if inland ports count and they have an agreement with the foreigners down the Danube. On the one hand it looks like they stole half of Romania at some point in history, on the other they might just be powerful enough to intimidate Romania into letting Austrohungarian barges or vessels pass through fare-free. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:23, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Romania was allied to Austria-Hungary from 1883 to 1914 in the Triple Alliance (perversely, it was the fourth member). It declared neutrality in 1914 and in 1916 sided with the Entente Allies in the hope of reuniting ethnic Romanians living in Habsburg territories, but only succeeded in getting itself invaded. [1] Alansplodge (talk) 15:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Transylvania was a late addition to Romania, and did not become so until the break-up of the Austro-Hungarian empire. The first Romanian state was the United Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia, and while Romanian speakers lived in some of Transylvania, they were not included in this state, and neither was of Moldova/Bessarabia. Romania only included those two territories after World War I and the dissolution of Austria-Hungary (see Greater Romania, which was the Romanian state at its greatest extent, and the only time period when Romania included essentially all Romanian speakers). Austria-Hungary never "stole" anything from Romania (Hungary did during World War II when it took back Northern Transylvania, but that was not Austria-Hungary). --Jayron 32 12:11, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That was an informative history lesson. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 12:27, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The tri-national construction of the Sip Canal, completed in 1898, allowed bigger ships to navigate the Danube through the Iron Gates. This led to the expansion of the Port of Vienna, "one of the largest ports on the Danube River". Alansplodge (talk) 12:37, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In the First World War, the Austro-Hungarian Navy was based at Trieste, Pola (now Pula), Sebenico (now Sibenik in Croatia) and Cattaro, (now Kotor in Montenegro). Alansplodge (talk) 12:56, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When my family saw the "Sound of Music" movie in an early 1970s re-release, some of us were confused by Von Trapp formerly being in the Austrian Navy -- I guess I knew enough geography, but not enough history... AnonMoos (talk) 23:44, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also see Admiral Horthy of the Kingdom of Hungary (1920–1946), who was once called "An Admiral without a Navy leading a Kingdom without a King"--Jayron 32 12:14, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 12:21, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Funny that he that he presumably fought with Germany then 1.5 or 2 decades later was strongly against it. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not funny at all. There were many people who fought for Austro-Hungary or Germany in World War I, and later opposed or fought against Nazi Germany. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There were plenty of conservative officers in the German military who weren't too fond of Hitler either, they tried to blow him up in 1944; sadly too little too late. General Friedrich Paulus referred to him as "that Bohemian corporal". Alansplodge (talk) 00:58, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why'd ~~they~~he do that? Hitler doesn't seem particularly bohemian and Bohemia was only a small and Czech and/or Slovakian part of Austria-Hungary. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:14, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably Paulus meant "Bohemian" in the cultural sense, given that Hitler spent a portion of his earlier life as an impoverished painter. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.56.237 (talk) 03:43, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the artist thing. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 04:13, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the insult was the invention of President Paul von Hindenburg (another conservative officer), who "mistook Hitler’s home town of Braunau in Austria (Braunau am Inn) for another town of the same name, Broumov (Braunau in German) in Bohemia... [it was] a pejorative term as [Hindenburg] regarded Bohemians as 'essentially gypsies' unlike the more cultured Prussians". See Gefreiter#Bohemian corporal. Alansplodge (talk) 16:01, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the curious, this article describes Georg von Trapp's distinguished naval career. Alansplodge (talk) 01:05, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Right, more like the number one rapper is white (Eminem), number one golfer is black (Tiger Woods) and Germany doesn't want to go to war joke of '03, enough for a cheap joke but a lot had still changed in the meantime. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:05, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for this entire conversation, you guys! It was a pleasure reading it! Futurist110 (talk) 22:38, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Singing in Parliament

Having an enforced holiday over the festive season, I thought an article called List of songs sung in the United Kingdom Parliament might be a worthy project. I already have Britons, Strike Home! (1797), The Red Flag (several times since 1945), Calon Lân (2019) and Ode to Joy (also in 2019 and sung to the words "La, La, La" because they didn't know the lyrics in German or English). Are there any others? I was certain that I would find Rule Britannia! but no luck so far, only Jacob Rees-Mogg playing it from his mobile phone, which is the worst kind of cheating. Alansplodge (talk) 15:19, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't mention the National Anthem, sung in the House of Commons on 18 September 1914 and again in 1919. --Antiquary (talk) 17:48, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Land was sung in the Division Lobby and by Members entering the House in July 1920. ^[1] DuncanHill (talk) 18:06, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And a surprise entry for "Yellow Submarine", sung in Latin by Derek Enright in the Commons in 1993. --Antiquary (talk) 18:09, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bread of Heaven and Jerusalem, on same occaision as Calon Lân in 2019. I suspect Jerusalem has been sung there before. DuncanHill (talk) 18:22, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Welsh hymn called "Adenydd colomen pe cawn" was sung in the House of Lords by Thomas Jones, Baron Maelor in 1980. --Antiquary (talk) 18:54, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Red Flag was sung in the Commons as early as April 1923.^[2] DuncanHill (talk) 18:56, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Scots Wha Hae and Flower of Scotland in 2019.^[3] DuncanHill (talk) 19:17, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks all. I may widen the net, since the Canadian Parliament has managed We Wish You a Merry Christmas by all members in 1985 and a solo parody of Jingle Bells in 2017. To their credit, the New Zealand Parliament performed Rule Britannia! in 1902. [2] Alansplodge (talk) 19:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Canadian Parliament seems more amenable to singing than the UK one (this clip suggests it's rather discouraged in the UK House of Commons) - singing the Canadian national anthem seems to be a regular event ([3], [4]), and this clip shows a fairly enthusiastic rendition of Happy Birthday (to Queen Elizabeth II) followed by God Save the Queen. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:58, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A late UK entry: James Cleverly sang "The Star-Spangled Banner" in the Commons in 2016. I take it, by the way, that you're only interested in singing in the chambers of the Commons and the Lords. Singing in St Mary Undercroft seems to be not uncommon, as you might expect. --Antiquary (talk) 21:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. There's also a Parliament Choir, but I was thinking of limiting it to when the legislature was actually in session. Alansplodge (talk) 00:34, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you're thinking of NZ, there is this [5] of Pōkarekare Ana but it looks to me like it was the gallery so not sure if that should count. Singing from the gallery isn't of course something that's generally allowed [6], it can happen with permission [7] but I wonder if that instances was actually with permission or simply ignored. I think there is also some tradition of singing a waiata during parliament opening sessions and speeches [8] [9] [10] and other occasions [11] [12] but it doesn't seem to be well documented what (as shown in the last example, I don't think they are all established songs) and I think many of those may have also been from the gallery with permission and with some MPs joining in. Nil Einne (talk) 15:52, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Whitehead, Andrew (1 May 2011). "God Gave the Land to the People: the Liberal 'Land Song'". History at Large. History Workshop. Retrieved 20 December 2020.
^ Toye, Richard (March 2014). "'Perfectly Parliamentary'? The Labour Party and the House of Commons in the Inter-war Years". Twentieth Century British History. 25 (1): 1–29. doi:10.1093/tcbh/hws049.
^ Parker, Rebecca (10 September 2019). "Watch as SNP MPs sing Scots Wha Hae during House of Commons protest". The Herald. Glasgow. Retrieved 20 December 2020.

Which (all) Wikipedia articles still retain Honorifics?

Are there any articles still retain Honorifics in title or content?

I wish to use the answers @ Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Titles, honorifics and appeal to popularity

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 17:09, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking no articles use honorifics. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 18:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I fought a losing battle against Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:14, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does Alexandra have a surname? I think that would be the main thing. Temerarius (talk) 23:18, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes she does. Ogilvy since she married Angus Ogilvy and before that Windsor.Spinney Hill (talk) 00:26, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mahatma Gandhi, U Thant, Dame Edna... Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:13, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charlemagne... Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:53, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who, Prince Caspian, Major Major Major Major, Sheik Yerbouti... --Jayron 32 12:01, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also Alfred, Lord Tennyson, noted above. Also, Lord Byron. --Jayron 32 12:27, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, probably hundreds do. Many articles use honorific titles in the names of their holders, especially where the holder was known by such title. Consider Cardinal Richelieu or Saint Peter for example. William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin is still, today, known almost exclusively as Lord Kelvin, and many many articles include honorifics in the way of Tennyson, after a comma following their name, such as Simon de Montfort, 6th Earl of Leicester or Henry I, Duke of Guise. --Jayron 32 12:35, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The section Titles of people of our manual of style, which includes a subsection Honorifics, instructs us not to use such titles as part of a subjects name, but lays out an exception to the general rule (based on the WP:COMMONNAME policy, which trumps guidelines). Almost all examples above are examples of this specified exception. I don't know why The Honourable Lady succeeded in avoiding the title axe, other than by the stubbornness of an editor choosing to ignore all rules. --Lambiam 12:43, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right on that last one, Wikipedia is a big place, and the existence of any single exemplar of anything is not useful as a means to understand any aspect of its operation other than "some one person decided it should be so". There are lots of articles that "violate" one rule or another, and only do so due to their obscurity and/or the fact that no one really cares. --Jayron 32 13:19, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are numerous articles titled like Prince Alexander of Liechtenstein (1929–2012), even disregarding redirects. —Tamfang (talk) 03:47, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a distinction between honorific styles and honorific titles. The former are things like "The Right Honourable" and "His Grace", which we don't use in running text or at the start of articles. The latter are things like "Sir" and "Dame", which we do use regularly. In normal usage (in countries where they are granted), the latter are treated as part of a person's name. Sir Keir Starmer, for instance, would generally be referred to as such on news programmes or in newspapers. He would generally not be referred to as "the Right Honourable Sir Keir Starmer" except in the most formal of contexts. I suspect that a lot of the reluctance on Wikipedia to use honorific styles derives from the fact that they generally ascribe some kind of positive quality to the person being referred to - e.g. that they are extremely honourable, or majestic, or holy - and it is felt that it is not neutral for Wikipedia to be seen as endorsing that ascription. (In countries where they are commonplace, that is generally not the perception - very few people in the UK would consider politicians even slightly honourable - but I can see why it could be taken that way.) Peerages (like those held by Tennyson, Byron and Kelvin, referred to above) are not honorifics at all, but substantive titles: effectively offices held by the peers concerned. Referring to Tennyson as "His Lordship" would be using an honorific; referring to him as "Lord Tennyson" is simply stating who and what he was. Proteus (Talk) 10:26, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

is purpose/principle/value is enumerated anywhere?

As User:Proteus says in above comment those Wikipedians who wanted to introduced MOS:HONORIFIC to avoid in Wikipedia must have had some purpose/principle/value behind the same; but I do not see purpose/principle/value behind enumerated in MOS:HONORIFIC; Whether is purpose/principle/value behind enumerated any where else in Wikipedia in express manner? Bookku (talk) 08:02, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku: As a "courtesy title of respect", an identifying appellation signifying status or function, adding this to a name (title) is not as of importance in the scheme of a world encyclopedia. The bottom line is that consensus, on an article and project level will usually suffice and sometimes a more broad consensus is involved. As mentioned above, this is a big place but courtesy titles should be limited to clear cases of disambiguation or every subject involving clergy, Reverend, Father, Rabbi, Bishop (The Right Reverend), Mother Superior, etc..., could be argued for inclusion. This can of worms could also include professors, doctors, lawyers, and a variable host of other courtesy titles of occupation or religious and scholarly recognition. There is also a case that editors will go overboard. I just deleted many added redundant "Rabbi" listings from an article. The neutrality would be that the name should be listed and the occupation covered in the article. The goal should be encyclopedic coverage and not the elevation of the status of a subject. -- Otr500 (talk) 13:37, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose in excluding "courtesy titles of respect" (particularly ones like Mr., Ms., Dr., Prof., Hon., Fr., Msgr., Rev., etc., including combinations thereof such as "Rt. Hon. Rev. Dr. Prof.") from both article titles and most article text is a matter of consistency with the modern style guides most readers and editors here prefer, of brevity in most cases (in an article about a doctor called John Smith, most in-text mentions of a "Smith" will be about him, so it's just wasted characters), and moreover that the intention where a lot of these end up used is for puffery (especially Dr. and Prof.; see MOS:CREDENTIAL), such as to inflate the importance of a reference or remarks about the article subject. And let's be clear, the answer to why we do this lies within the description: "courtesy titles of respect". While it is decidedly not Wikipedia's place to disparage people, it's also not Wikipedia's place to grant courtesies and pay respect to anybody, or to decide who merits courtesies or particular respects. Wikipedia's job is to communicate information, such as who somebody is. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 15:36, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vaccine test placebo subjects

When do COVID vaccine test subjects learn if they got the placebo and are those who did fast-tracked for the approved vaccine? Hayttom (talk) 17:27, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to ask at the science ref desk. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 18:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In many cases it will come down to individual choice. See The placebo paradox: Why a COVID-19 vaccine trial participant might drop out (Dawn Sinclair Shapiro; December 9, 2020; Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists). -- ToE 22:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The first part should be specified in the protocol of each vaccine trial, of which there are many. See also www.clinicaltrials.gov and The New York Times' coronavirus vaccine tracker. The answer to the second question may be different from country to country; many countries do not know yet when they will start receiving the first vaccine doses and in which quantities. --Lambiam 12:17, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Whitehead, Andrew (1 May 2011). "God Gave the Land to the People: the Liberal 'Land Song'". History at Large. History Workshop. Retrieved 20 December 2020.

[2] Toye, Richard (March 2014). "'Perfectly Parliamentary'? The Labour Party and the House of Commons in the Inter-war Years". Twentieth Century British History. 25 (1): 1–29. doi:10.1093/tcbh/hws049.

[3] Parker, Rebecca (10 September 2019). "Watch as SNP MPs sing Scots Wha Hae during House of Commons protest". The Herald. Glasgow. Retrieved 20 December 2020.

[1]

[2]

[3]