Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Christ killers

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)

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.[https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/27/us/politics/trump-pardon-paul-walczak-tax-crimes.html?unlocked_article_code=1.KU8.sjc6.NKyPz9HyHmuD&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare][https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwynp1lw0l7o] 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 {{tq|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 =

File:The Battle of Ridgeway.jpg

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. [https://archive.org/details/fenianraidatfort00ketc/page/51/mode/1up here] and [https://archive.org/details/stjamessmagazin9187unse_3/page/317/mode/1up 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)

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)

:::: I don't think I've ever seen it recorded where the convention started, but the article cites Napoleon having ordered it in Paris in 1805 with particular reference to the orientation of the street in relation to the Seine. I recall having had a non-standard local town house numbering scheme in NZ explained to me that the choice of sides was effectively a direction finder - by keeping odd numbers on one's left as one walked one would eventually find their way to the centre of town. (This sceheme involved having even numbers on the left viewed from the start of each street - the reverse of what the current standard prescribes). Daveosaurus (talk) 08:10, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::That's pretty neat. Is it a grid city or organic? Is there a landmark in the center of town like a square or building or traffic circle or major intersection? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:38, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::: It began as a grid which it very quickly outgrew (which is typical of cities in New Zealand). It also had a recognisable centre landmark (although I think it was actually the post office - which was maybe 100 yards from the centre landmark - which was being measured to).Daveosaurus (talk) 07:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

::I believe I have seen all four possible assignments of odds and evens in different American grid cities. —Tamfang (talk) 19:51, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Now that I know this I'll never visit city without checking parity again! For the longest time I assumed it's inconsistent (I learned 1251 6th Avenue was odd west around age 16 didn't realize 6th Av was an outlier). So perhaps NYC and/or some other cities had some other reason like "random" or "mayor or numberer felt even was more important" or "someone wanted their house to be 1"? I always wanted a book or site with factoids+oddities like these i.e. how was parity picked, is 6697 Broadway NYC's highest "England-style" (consecutive), did numbered streets once go higher, does anything start <1, do multiple "extras" exist like 9/9A/9B, what's the lowest jail island # (a directory has 9-09 Hazen Street), highest suffix in 100-per-block-territory (it exceeds -99 in dashland?), are Manhattan numbered streets great circles or rhumb lines (each avenue's as parallel to a 28°59'38.27" rhumb (10th) as they could survey), which intersections are exactly 90°, exact coordinates of all NYC intersections (beyond a certain accuracy this is way harder to estimate than it'd seem (lanes/curbs/building edges move, mass-market maps aren't accurate enough, a better but not GIS good app I know misaligns i.e. Open Street Map vs topo+even the orthorectified photos are blurrier than Google Sat+show building sides that I'm 100% sure aren't one of the slanting ones), etc. Does a book or site like that exist? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:07, 4 June 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.^{[https://www.google.com/maps/dir/435+Tasso+St,+Palo+Alto,+CA+94301,+USA/1319+Tasso+St,+Palo+Alto,+CA+94301,+USA/@37.4457771,-122.1587525,16z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x808fbb3897d5e193:0x155083fe389d9e00!2m2!1d-122.1589716!2d37.4494369!1m5!1m1!1s0x808fbb19b91f81af:0x64690aba46219a4a!2m2!1d-122.1481284!2d37.4425247!3e2?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDUyNy4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D]} 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 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_tallest_buildings_in_New_York_City&oldid=1015154147 here]. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:03, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

thumb

::::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)

:::What defines Japanese numbering-blocks? Can a block cross a street, or be bounded in part by a non-street? —Tamfang (talk) 19:57, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

::::That I do not know or even if the answers are consistent nationwide. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

::I remember reading that at least within the Tokyo metropolitan area, most residences within a given district are numbered according to how old they are, or how recently they were constructed. So a higher number would denote a newer built house. I don't know if this logic applies to, or has ever applied to, other parts of Japan. 72.234.12.37 (talk) 14:03, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

= May 30 =

An 1816 publication,

• {{Cite Q|Q106612012 |hdl=unset}}

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" [https://www.paisleyabbey.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Abbey-Herald-February-2024-for-website.pdf "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 [https://www.ancestry.com/genealogy/records/alexander-rd-chief-dunollie-macdougall-24-1pvyp "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 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[https://kasmana.people.charleston.edu/MATHFICT/default.html] 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 [https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/literature-and-writing/first-circle-aleksandr-solzhenitsyn here]. Alansplodge (talk) 15:56, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

::Although Gleb Nerzhin is a mathematician (as is Vladimir Erastovich Chelnov^{[https://books.google.com/books?id=ygskUTS6Du4C&dq=%22Vladimir+Erastovich+Chelnov%22&pg=PR27&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&hl=en]}), 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 =

What medals and honours was Charles wearing during his recent opening of the Canadian parliament, as seen in 2025 royal visit to Canada and [https://www.independent.co.uk/bulletin/news/kind-charles-canada-donald-trump-b2759051.html 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)

{{Section resolved|1=Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:27, 2 June 2025 (UTC)}}

= June 1 =

File:Mabbett & Wiles, Philadelphia, advertising card - 1876 - obverse.jpg

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.[https://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/0118/report.pdf][https://www.usgenwebsites.org/NJCamden/townships/stockton_township.html] Most likely named after the Beideman family,[https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-philadelphia-inquirer-jacob-beideman/29432476/] 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.[https://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/essays/ferries/] 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)

{{Section resolved|1=Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:26, 2 June 2025 (UTC)}}

= June 2 =

J. Willoughby Harrison was a professional photographer active in Birmingham, England, in the 1920s and 30s. Although there are some press credits ([https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-birmingham-post-birminghams-hall-of/173665683/], [https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-birmingham-post-reopening-of-the-tow/173665631/]), sufficiently few are found that he may well not have been a newspaper employee.

He was evidently well connected, taking photographs of James Watt's workshop before its removal to London ([https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co50936/four-transparencies-of-james-watts-workshop]), and taking pictures for the city's official 1937 coronation brochure ([http://www.eaglehurst.net/1937_coronation_brochure.pdf]).

His address in November 1926 was given as "[illegible; 40, 46 or 48?], St. Oswald's Road, Small Heath" in Birmingham ([https://www.newspapers.com/article/birmingham-gazette-striking-photograph-i/173666022/]).

However, there are very few search results for him, other than image credits. What was his full name, and dates? Can we learn anything else about him? Or find an image of him? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:52, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

:On 1921 census James Willoughby Harrison (47) Commercial Photographer b. Nottingham and at 46 St. Oswalds Rd. Small Heath.

:

:1911 Census at 94 Somerville Rd. Small Heath.

:1901 in Derbyshire. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:55, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

:::When you use an appropriate threshold (18 on 0..255) to turn the greyscale of image into either pure black or pure white, the illegible number in the newspaper clipping also turns into an unambiguous 46.  ​‑‑Lambiam 19:33, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

::The [https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000521/19370216/053/0008 Derby Evening Telegraph 16 February 1937] lists him amongst the family mourners at the funeral of "Mr. Charles Barrow Keene (77), of 9, North-parade, Derby, one of the town's best-known photographers". C. B. Keene was one of the sons of Richard Keene and ingerited his business. DuncanHill (talk) 14:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

::[https://freepages.rootsweb.com/~brett/genealogy/photos/rkeene.html Another noted English photographer, James Willoughby Harrison (1873-1960), trained with Richard Keene and, upon Charles Keene's death in 1937, inherited books and photographic collections from both. J.W. Harrison's daughter, in turn, donated these to the Lambeth Palace Library.]. DuncanHill (talk) 14:08, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Yes; sadly not a reliable source for citations, though. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:12, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

::::But provide info that can be used to search with. DuncanHill (talk) 14:18, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Oh, indeed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:23, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

:::His glass negatives in Lambeth Palace library: [https://images.lambethpalacelibrary.org.uk/luna/servlet/detail/LPLIBLPL~17~17~180096~131288?sort=creator%2Ctype%2Cdate%2Ctitle&qvq=q:MS3614;sort:creator%2Ctype%2Cdate%2Ctitle;lc:LPLIBLPL~17~17&mi=7&trs=8] Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:20, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Born 30 July 1873, Baptised 9 Nov 1873 at St Nicholas Church, Nottingham. Parents James and Sarah, of Truswell's Yard. Copy emailed to you. DuncanHill (talk) 14:23, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Much of the above now collected at {{q|Q134673669}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:34, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

:1939 Register, [something] photographer living at 46 St Oswald's Road, Birmingham, with Charlotte Harrison dob 19 July 1879, unpaid domestic duties, and Hazel W, dob 9 Sept 1918, art student. DuncanHill (talk) 14:50, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

::Is Hazel also on the 1921 census? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Hazel Willoughby Harrison is, living with James Willoughby (Commercial Photographer, own account) and Charlotte Amelia (Home Duties) at 46 St Oswald's Road. She is 2 years and 8 months old, and was born in Essington, Staffs. DuncanHill (talk) 20:29, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

= June 3 =

An answer to a question on another desk led me to read our articles Good King Wenceslas and Wenceslaus I, Duke of Bohemia. According to both "a cult of Wenceslaus grew up in Bohemia and in England". Now Bohemia makes sense, he was a Bohemian. But England? Why? Thanks, DuncanHill (talk) 01:27, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

:The story of a ruler perceived as particularly holy and good being assassinated (in 935 CE) carries an implicit message that one should not assassinate rulers. Perhaps this was a message that the religious and civil authorities in England particularly wanted to reinforce during the 10th century, when England as a newly unified nation just freed of Viking occupation (datable to 937 CE) was still being consolidated. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.192.228.242 (talk) 07:34, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

:True, both of those articles do claim that there was a cult of Wenceslas in England, but they both support it by citing a website which, so far as I can see, makes no mention of England. I may not have clicked in the right places there, I suppose, but two reliable-looking sources specifically deny that there was any medieval cult of Wenceslas here. [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=66zbBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA249#v=onepage&q&f=false] [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_zJJtvK2_KsC&pg=PA445#v=onepage&q&f=false]. --Antiquary (talk) 10:57, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

::The question is indeed whether the statement, not supported by the cited sources, is true. The ruler of England at the time of Wenceslas's death was Æthelstan, the first "King of the English", described as "one of the most pious West Saxon kings". Promoting the narrative of the Good King may have been politically expedient.  ​‑‑Lambiam 14:24, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

:::I'd imagine any English cult would have been much later, perhaps after the marriage of Anne of Bohemia to Richard II in 1382, which brought increased awareness of Bohemia into the English court. I can't see where the first ref Antiquary gives mentions the subject, and the 2nd says there was no "ancient" cult in England, meaning who knows what. Experts ought to know if and when his feast pops up in the calendars of books of hours etc. Generally the monarchy, and Richard II more than most, was keen to promote saints who were kings - see the Wilton Diptych etc. Johnbod (talk) 17:49, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

::::My first ref says, "Wenceslas...The cult of the saint of this name was not practised in medieval England, but was widespread in continental Europe." --Antiquary (talk) 17:59, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Ok thanks, I see it now, but if there was no cult in medieval England, why does he get an explanatory note? Date is soon after RII I see. Johnbod (talk) 18:02, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::Maybe figure out which user added that claim, and ask them about it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:31, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::::I found [https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Butler_s_Lives_of_the_Saints_September/-KKc-SzyoEUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA257 The Lives of the Saints (p. 257)] which says:

:::::::{{xt|Despite the popular Christmas carol " Good King Wenceslas " there has been no widespread popular devotion to St Wenceslas in England . His feast was introduced with the Roman Missal.}} [i.e. in the late 15th-century]

:::::::Alansplodge (talk) 17:15, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::::I have removed the bit "in England" from both articles, as being not supported by the cited source and moreover apparently quite dubious.  ​‑‑Lambiam 18:36, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

= June 4 =

The book The Future of the Past by Alexander Stille contains the following anecdote in the conclusion:

{{Quote|text=In one sense, traditional societies are more burdened by the past.

Much of their mental energy—as in Kitawa (chapter 6)—must be taken up by learning and memorizing the traditions, oral poetry, and incantations of their ancestors. But oral cultures are often wrongly thought to be entirely tradition bound and unchanging. The fact that nothing is written down actually allows them a certain freedom from tradition that written cultures lack. British colonial officials dutifully recorded that in the foundation myth of a certain region of Africa the kingdom's founder had seven sons, which corresponded to the seven territories of the land. When the British came back sixty years later, they were surprised to learn that the local people now insisted that the mythic founder of their kingdom had had five rather than seven sons. When the British pulled out the written document to prove their point, the locals insisted that it was simply mistaken. In the intervening decades, the political situation had changed and the area was now divided into five and not seven territories. The oral tradition responded by changing the myth, while nonetheless maintaining (and no doubt believing) that it was immutable and unchanging.|author=Alexander Stille|title=The Future of the Past}}

Does anyone know where I can find a source for this anecdote, or more information about the specific region or culture being referenced in this story? I thought it might be from Jan Vansina's Oral Tradition as History, but I haven't been able to find it there so far. Puzzledvegetable^{Is it teatime already?} 02:19, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

:"The Gonja nation of Africa was studied by anthropologists as early as the beginning of the twentieth century. The land of the Gonja then consisted of seven main regions. Anthropologists recorded a story of origin of the Gonja nation according to which once upon a time there was a great and famous chief who conquered the country and divided it among his seven sons. Later the British colonial administrative authority reduced the number of regions to five. After a few decades the Gonja people still told the same story of conquest with unbroken pride, with the slight difference that the great chief had five rather than seven sons (Goody and Watt 1963, quoted by Hilton et al. 1996). This sort of ‘rewriting’ is quite common in the history of European nations too, and can be observed at a time of rapid social changes." From The Science of Stories by János László. Routledge, 2006. pp 162-163. "Goody and Watt 1963" is Jack Goody and Ian Watt (1963) ‘[https://worrydream.com/refs/Goody_1963_-_The_Consequences_of_Literacy.pdf The consequences of literacy]’, Comparative Studies in Society and History 5: 304–326., and "Hilton et al 1996" is Hilton, D.J., Erb, H.-P., Dermot, M. and Molian, D.J. (1996) ‘Social representations of history and attitudes to European unification in Britain, France and Germany’, in G.M. Breakwell and E. Lyons (eds) Changing European Identities. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. DuncanHill (talk) 03:47, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

:See our articles Gonja people and Gonja (kingdom). DuncanHill (talk) 03:49, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

:The relevant passage from Goody and Watt is:

Organisational changes lead to similar adjustments. The state of Gonja in Northern Ghana is divided into a number of divisional chiefdoms, certain of which are recognised as providing in turn the ruler of the whole nation, When asked to explain their system the Gonja recount how the founder of the state, Ndewura Jakpa, came down from the Niger Bend in search of gold, conquered the indigenous inhabitants of the area and enthroned himself as chief of the state and his sons as rulers of its territorial divisions. At his death the divisional chiefs succeeded to the paramountcy in turn. When the details of this story were first recorded at the turn of the present century, at the time the British were extending their control over the area, Jakpa was said to have begotten seven sons, this corresponding to the number of divisions whose heads were eligible for the supreme office by virtue of their descent from the founder of the particular chiefdom. But at the same time as the British had arrived, two of the seven divisions disappeared, one being deliberately incorporated in a neighboring division because its rulers had supported a Mandingo invader, Samori, and another because of some boundary changes introduced by the British administration. Sixty years later, when the myths of

state were again recorded, Jakpa was credited with only five sons and no mention was made of the founders of the two divisions which had since disappeared from the political map.

:That was a lot more fun than if Mr Stille had bothered to give references in his book. DuncanHill (talk) 04:14, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

::Stille's book is a fun read, but passages like this really frustrated me. Writing something like "the foundation myth of a certain region of Africa" really puzzles me. Did he not actually remember which region it was, and if he did, did he just decide it fit the tone of the book better not to mention it?

::Out of curiosity, were you already familiar with this story, or do you have some kind of workflow for finding sources like these, because I really struggle when I encounter these kinds of readings. Thanks. Puzzledvegetable^{Is it teatime already?} 04:54, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

:::To be perfectly honest my initial reaction was that it was going to be one of those "bees can't fly" or "Pepsi had the world's sixth most powerful navy" kind of facts, and "a certain region in Africa" was the phrase that made me most suspicious, as both precise and meaningless. But I wouldn't be able to call it out unless I had tried to find the original. I tried googling odd phrases from the passage you supplied. Most of my efforts came up with variations on the Tribes of Israel, and the English Heptarchy. Then I tried "five rather than seven sons", and that gave me exactly two hits - this page, and a site which had the János László book. That book as you saw had proper refs so there we were! So my workflow is just to use google, but I have years of experience trying to find answers to questions on these desks, and I seem to be able to come up with the right questions or phrases to ask it. I don't really know how to explain it, other than to say you need to boil down the passage into a few key ideas and work away at variations of them. I knew from experience that pretty much everything under the sun has been ascribed to some "tribe in Africa" or other over the years, either from outright racism or an over-developed sense of the exotic, so I concentrated on the numbers and brothers as being more essential. But there's an awful lot of luck involved. DuncanHill (talk) 09:49, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

= June 5 =

Was there any historical work or source that mentions or specifies which of Odin's eyes was removed and sacrificed to the Well of Urd/Mimir in exchange for a drink of knowledge? A lot of artwork and popular culture depictions I've seen of the Allfather seems to be wildly back-and-forth about this detail (for example, the video-games Age of Mythology, Odin Sphere, Assassin's Creed: Valhalla, and the film Son of the Mask depict his left eye as missing, while Marvel comics and films, Disney's Gargoyles, the video-games SMITE and God of War Ragnarök, and the televised series Vikings and American Gods, depict his right as the missing eye), and I don't recall any of the Eddas specify which eye he tore out; only that he sacrifices "an eye" to the Well. Which I suppose is evidence that there is no definitive or consistent answer, and that it is left up to interpretation; perhaps the Norse/Germanic peoples (or Snorri himself) really didn't care that hard about which eye it was...

But a part of me feels that wouldn't make much sense, as for comparison, it is very clearly specified that it is Týr's right hand that was bitten off by Fenrir, because from what I understood, there is a cultural symbolism behind that; the right side is the dominant hand for most people in the world, so it was seen by the Norse/Germanic peoples as the weapon-holding hand, the oath-swearing hand; the loss of which was meant to be a profound loss for a war deity who was also associated with loyalty, pledges, laws, and promises between fellow men.

I have heard of a suggestion that Odin gave up a metaphorical or esoteric "mind's eye" instead, but I don't think that the Norse/Germanic peoples held an understanding of aphantasia, considering how expansive and colourful their own mythology is; I don't even know if they understood the concept of a mind's eye to begin with. I have also heard of the argument that the right eye is more likely to be portrayed as missing, as that is processed by the left side of the brain dedicated to logical thought, while the brain's right side is dedicated to abstract and emotional thought; thus, the missing right eye would amplify Odin's powers of creativity and foresight by retaining his left eye. However, I don't think that the Norse/Germanic peoples would know of all that either, and honestly, it feels like a grasping-at-straws effort to use modern knowledge to explain something from mythology, instead of contemporary knowledge that the peoples of the time would know.

What do you guys think of this? 72.234.12.37 (talk) 13:52, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

:The question is dicussed [https://www.norsemyth.org/2021/05/the-left-eye-of-odin-or-right.html here], and the discussion implies that the answer is not part of the mythological canon.  ​‑‑Lambiam 15:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

:File:Odinskopf.JPG

:What I found was: the Finnestorp buckle shows (presumed) Odin with his right eye closed and his left eye open. The Torslunda plates are somewhat too old but (doubtful) Odin, top left, has his right eye damaged. [https://samlingar.shm.se/object/79B27EF4-8E13-47F9-A6BD-F85BC6BB743C This figure from Lindby is viking-age] but the text doesn't specify right or left eye; to me it looks like his right eye. The Funen bracteate has Odin in profile such that only his left eye is visible, as does [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vindelev_bracteate_x13_with_runes.jpg this other bracteate]. This carving is about 100 years post-viking, but it's the right eye again. Score is right eye 6, left eye 0. (Sorry Age of Mythology, I still love you.) By the way, the creative function of the right side of the brain is dubious, and so is the implication that vikings studied brain damage and established the location of Brocca's area eight centuries early, as well as homonymous hemianopsia - and note that it's half the visual field, in both eyes, that's linked to a brain hemisphere; it's not as simple as right eye goes to left brain.  Card Zero  (talk) 19:04, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{quote|What price, Odin asks, must he pay for a drink from the Well of Wisdom that Mimir's head guards? The answer: Your right eye|source={{cite book|author=Doll, M.A|year=2011|title=The More of Myth|chapter=The Eye in the Well of Memory|chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-6091-445-4_2|publisher=Sense Publishers|page=9}} [https://link-springer-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/chapter/10.1007/978-94-6091-445-4_2 wplibrary link]}} which goes on to discuss some left/right brain symbolism. This would seem to be a good answer from an RS, but i would expect here a citation to a particular translation of a source document. What we get is one to Padraic Colum's [https://archive.org/details/mythsofworld00colurich/page/194/mode/2up Myths of the World]. fiveby(zero) 20:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

::{{quote|No text specifies which eye was surrendered.|source={{cite journal|author1=Price, Neil|author2=Mortimer, Paul|year=2014|title=An Eye for Odin? Divine Role-Playing in the Age of Sutton Hoo|work=European Journal of Archaeology|volume=17|issue=3|page=532|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1179/1461957113Y.0000000050}} [https://www-cambridge-org.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/core/journals/european-journal-of-archaeology/article/an-eye-for-odin-divine-roleplaying-in-the-age-of-sutton-hoo/FA2BE2AD8B8F38D8E26B05B2AE729350 wplibrary link]}}

::fiveby(zero) 20:52, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

::If there was a consistent tradition in contemporary artistic depictions, with every artist having seen older ones, everyone would 'know' it was the right eye (and might refer to the 'fact' orally) without any written text (a rare thing) needing to specify it.

::There might also have been an awareness of Ocular dominance (which is self-observable), with an implicit reason within the myth for the likely (70%) dominant eye being the one sacrificed. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.81.243 (talk) 06:22, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

: Hey! I am working on a rewrite of the current article and have a little material on this. You can find the sections at the section on Sacrifice and possibly the section on Wisdom. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 06:35, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Yesterday's Doctor: An Autobiography was published by the Prairie Press of Winnipeg, MB in 1980, two years after the death of its author, Dr. Samuel Peikoff, who practiced medicine in Winnipeg for a long time and earlier, for a shorter time, in rural Rossburn, MB. It is an account of events of the author's professional life as a physician and surgeon, and only of his professional life. Personal connections not bearing on his professional life are not there. Perhaps the most extreme example is that when he decided for professional reasons to spend a few months in Scotland, he tells us he took his wife and son with him, but never before that in the book did he mention that he had a wife or a son.

Is it normal to call a book like that an "autobiography"? Michael Hardy (talk) 20:27, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

:IIRC, Carton de Wiart didn't mention his wife or his VC, and the latter surely had some relevance to his life as a soldier. A biographer, auto or otherwise, has to decide what to leave out. I had a conversation with a historian at a conference a few months ago on similar lines. He gave an example on the lines of "A fly circled the lampshade. The curtains were a faded red velvet, complementing the worn Persian carpeting, on which the Syldavian ambassador lay dead, stabbed by his Ruritanian counterpart." Most of that isn't history, only "the Syldavian ambassador lay dead, stabbed by his Ruritanian counterpart" is. Your good doctor must have felt personal matters were a circling fly or faded curtain. One does read "political biographies", which emphasise the political doings of their subjects, and tend to regard the private lives as little more than Persian carpets, I suppose you could call "Yesterday's Doctor" a medical auto-biography. DuncanHill (talk) 21:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

: Barry Jones (Australian politician) published an autobiography titled A Thinking Reed: The extraordinary life of Barry Jones, in 2006. He drops a lot of famous names, but their inclusion is inversely proportional to the depth of his personal involvement with them. If he met a celebrity once at a cocktail party, they're in the book. But most of his close political colleagues, with whom he worked for decades, and his first wife, Rosemary, to whom he was married for 45 years and who died shortly before the book was published, rate hardly any mention at all. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:13, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

• I suppose you could argue this closer to a memoir - a collection of one's memories, usually with a limited scope - than an autobiography - a study of a person's life, written by the person themselves - but there's no clear definition of these genres. Smurrayinchester 08:37, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

:: In my perennial search for the perfect way to organise my home library, this issue has always loomed large. If an autobiography is about their whole life (so far), is that essentially any different from their specific memories of their time at Oxford, or their dissolute decade on the Greek islands? A memoir is a limited type of autobiography, but a more extensive autobiography is not normally called a memoir. There's no one-size-fits-all solution to this intractable problem. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:37, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Someone with too much money (and ample space) can buy multiple copies of a multi-classifiable title, so as to have a copy for each classification.  ​‑‑Lambiam 13:29, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

From VicTrack:

VicTrack...owns all railway and tram lines, associated rail lands, track corridors and other infrastructure in the state of Victoria, Australia.

Since much (maybe most?) of our tram network is embedded in the bitumen of major streets, how does the ownership situation work out? Do they own the physical rails whilst the roads themselves are owned by another entity (either VicRoads or local councils), or are the centres of these thoroughfares co-owned by the roads ownership and VicTrack, or something else? (I'm just doubtful that they'd own the entire roadway in the same manner that they own tracks on land where cars aren't allowed.) Obviously everything's owned by the Crown one way or another, and I assume the roads ownership and VicTrack have to cooperate on major maintenance projects regardless of ownership, but I'm specifically interested in the nitty-gritty details. Nyttend (talk) 23:31, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

:The articles Street running train and Reserved track are relevant to your questions, but do not go into the geographical and legal details you seek; however, the terms might aid your searching. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.81.243 (talk) 06:35, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

::VicTrack has a map of all their land ownership. The full map isn't public, but there's a limited version you can download for Google Earth (or other GIS) in KMZ format [https://www.victrack.com.au/get-help/railmap here], which might have the info you need. Smurrayinchester 08:25, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

= June 8 =

Hello. Donald J. Trump invoked 10 U.S.C. § 12406 to federalize the California National Guard a few hours ago[https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gkyggekgyo][https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/06/department-of-defense-security-for-the-protection-of-department-of-homeland-security-functions/].

1. I was reading the List of invocations of the Insurrection Act article. Does today's event qualify to be added to this list?

2. Is this the first time in history that 10 U.S.C. § 12406 has been invoked? A quick google search shows no previous historcal events.

Thank you.Epideurus (talk) Epideurus (talk) 03:24, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

:From an article published yesterday in The New York Times, updated today:^{[https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/07/us/trump-national-guard-deploy-rare.html]}

::{{tq|It is the first time since 1965 that a president has activated a state’s National Guard force without a request from that state’s governor, according to Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, an independent law and policy organization. The last time was when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators in 1965, she said.}}

:and

::{{tq|The National Guard was last federalized in 1992, Ms. Goitein said, when President George H.W. Bush sent troops to Los Angeles to control riots after police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King. That deployment was requested by the California’s governor at the time, Pete Wilson.}}

: ​‑‑Lambiam 06:06, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

:What does "federalize" mean? I ask as someone from Australia, another federated nation, where I have never heard or seen the word before. HiLo48 (talk) 23:50, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

::The National Guard (United States) is normally operated by the individual states, but the federal government has the power to call on them to perform federal missions. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:57, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:::HiLo48, when the US was formed, the original states retained their militias, and each new state formed a militia, but since the militia was under state control, it obviously couldn't go outside state boundaries. (This ensured that states couldn't fight each other with their militias, although an 1830s boundary dispute would have led to militia-militia conflict if the weather hadn't obstructed everything.) In the US Constitution, the states granted Congress an enumerated power over the militia whilst reserving normal control to themselves.) The US historically relied on its state militias for most military purposes and had a tiny regular army, so the enumerated power in question provides for the federal government to assume control over state militia(s) to act under federal control "to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions". Conversely, when our Constitution was enacted, Chapter II Section 69 provided for each state's naval and military departments to be transferred to the Commonwealth (with no exceptions, seemingly?) as soon as proclaimed by Earl Hope, so we don't encounter this concept here. Nyttend (talk) 00:09, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Thanks for that detailed explanation. The British colonies that federated to became Australia's states did previously have their own military forces, but it seems that upon federation they happily merged to become the Australian Navy and Army. So the American model is quite unfamiliar to me and most Australians. Just another example of American exceptionalism I guess. HiLo48 (talk) 01:42, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::This is, to some degree, where the Second Amendment came from: To allow "well-regulated" militias the right to keep and bear arms. The implication being an inherent distrust of the central government. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:08, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::{{br}}I don't think it's really that different. The modern US military is mostly the Army, Navy, and Air Force, all of which are under full-time federal control. People tend to forget about the National Guard except in unusual circumstances. A lot of their role is disaster management rather than military per se. (I was surprised to find there were Guard troops in the first Iraq war; if you'd asked me to guess I would have said they hadn't participated in foreign wars since at least the 19th century, but apparently that isn't true.) --Trovatore (talk) 06:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::Actually, US National Guard units were deployed heavily to Iraq for many years. Here is [https://reservenationalguard.com/reserve-guard-news/iraq-war-a-conflict-that-defined-the-national-guard/ an account]. They were also deployed to Afghanistan and Syria, and to various support bases in the Middle East. Over 300,000 National Guard troops were deployed to Iraq. Cullen328 (talk) 06:19, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

::::::: I did not know that. Thanks. --Trovatore (talk) 06:39, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

We have a few details in Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands#Other activities:

{{Blockquote|Willem-Alexander is an avid pilot and has said that if he had not been a royal, he would have liked to be an airline pilot so he could fly internationally on large-sized aircraft such as the Boeing 747.{{refn|name=":0"|{{Cite news |date=2017-05-17 |title=Dutch King Willem-Alexander reveals secret flights as first officer |language=en-GB |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39946532 |url-status=live |access-date=2017-05-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170517192222/http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39946532 |archive-date=2017-05-17}}}} During the reign of his mother, he regularly flew the Dutch royal aircraft on trips.{{refn|{{Cite news |date=2011 |title=FAQ – Dutch royalty |language=en-GB |work=Radio Netherlands Worldwide |url=http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/faq-dutch-royalty |url-status=dead |access-date=2013-01-28 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130127104421/http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/faq-dutch-royalty |archive-date=2013-01-27}}}} However, in May 2017, Willem-Alexander revealed that he had served as a first officer on KLM flights for 21 years, flying KLM Cityhopper's Fokker 70s twice a month, even after his accession to the throne. Following KLM's phased retirement of the Fokker 70, he began training to fly Boeing 737s. Willem-Alexander was rarely recognized while in the KLM uniform and wearing the KLM cap, though a few passengers recognized his voice, even though he never gave his name and only welcomed passengers on behalf of the captain and crew.{{r|:0}}{{refn|{{Cite web |last=Sephton |first=Connor |date=2017-05-17 |title=Dutch king reveals double life as an airline pilot for KLM |url=http://news.sky.com/story/dutch-king-reveals-double-life-as-an-airline-pilot-for-klm-10881947 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170518003140/http://news.sky.com/story/dutch-king-reveals-double-life-as-an-airline-pilot-for-klm-10881947 |archive-date=2017-05-18 |access-date=2017-05-17 |website=Sky News}}}} }}

{{Reflist-talk}}

but I would like to know more about his commercial flying activities, both before and after becoming King:

• Did he only pilot internal flights, or overseas? Where?
• Was his identity known to the authorities of those other countries?
• Did he use a regular passport? In what name?
• What name and titles did he use professionally, and how did he introduce himself to passengers?
• If some passengers recognised him, how did this not become a media circus?
• Was he ever involved in a reportable flying incident?
• Is he still flying commercially, or when did he stop?

I suspect Dutch-language sources may have more than those in English, and I'm a monoglot. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:48, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

:Details in Dutch sources are scarce.

:As of 2017 he had been flying twice a month, for 21 years, for KLM subsidiaries like Martinair and Cityhopper. all short distances.^{[https://www.aeroflap.com.br/nl/een-koning-die-ook-klm-commercieel-piloot-is/]} Destinations were (or included) the UK, Germany and Norway.^{[https://www.jobat.be/nl/art/welk-beroep-oefent-koning-willem-alexander-al-21-jaar-stiekem-uit]} As of now, he is looking forward to being retrained for an Airbus A321neo, currently making about three flight a momth as co-pilot in a Boeing 737.^{[https://www.ad.nl/binnenland/koning-willem-alexander-wordt-bijgeschoold-als-piloot~a4c9d00b/][https://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/nieuws/categorie/2/airlines/koning-willem-alexander-laat-zich-omscholen-naar-airbus-a321neo]}  ​‑‑Lambiam 14:19, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks; are those his destinations, or Cityhopper's? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:21, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Lambiam's source, auto-translated, says {{tq|Willem Alexander reportedly works mainly during short flights through Europe (the United Kingdom, Germany, Norway) and avoids long flights that would require him to fly at night. This way he is never too far away from the Netherlands, he should have to be at home in a crisis situation and he can just fly back.}} This can be lazily verified by looking at it, it's only Dutch, werkt = works and korte = short and lange = long, probably. Which makes vluchten "flights". I expect the last phrase could be better written and should he have to be at home in a crisis situation, he can just fly back.  Card Zero  (talk) 17:57, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

::::I remember a news report, not too long ago, about the king flying a KLM 737 with football supporters from Amsterdam to Prague. It wasn't publicly announced, but some people recognised him. It's generally known that the king does so regularly, so it isn't really newsworthy and usually not mentioned at all. The gossip press in the Netherlands are better behaved than in the UK.

::::I suppose Willem-Alexander flies just wherever KLM flies its 737s, provided the destination isn't too sensitive. That would be exclusively abroad, as the only "domestic" route of KLM is to the Caribbean part of the country, which is too far for a 737. PiusImpavidus (talk) 11:12, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

How would all of this work from a passport perspective if he flies to a non-Schengen country? As the King, can he have a diplomatic passport (and if so, does he need it), or can he do everything himself? Our Dutch passport article notes that the passport is formally issued by the Minister of Foreign Affairs on behalf of the King; can he self-certify? The idea of a head of state travelling privately-yet-openly, rather than incognito or as part of a group of dignitaries, seems very unusual. Nyttend (talk) 23:45, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

= June 9 =

Anthropologists use the term "foodways" to cover social customs and practices related to the consumption of food, ranging from recipes to dining etiquette. Many people use the term "drinking culture" to cover social customs and practices related to the consumption of alcoholic beverages. What about the consumption of non-alcoholic beverages, e.g. tea? I recently read a novel in which a short chapter is called "A Short Chapter About Tea", discussing the characters' tea-drinking habits and preferences, and I'm trying to think how to describe it. Nyttend (talk) 09:52, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

:Tea culture has a profound impact on society, influencing social customs, traditions, and even political movements. In different eras and regions, tea is not only a drink, but also a catalyst for communication, hospitality, and meditation. While Japan focuses on precision and beauty, and tea is often tasted in a quiet environment, India values ​​rich flavors and spices, and tea drinking is a communal experience as well as a symbol of refinement and social status. From a philosophical perspective, Japanese and Indian tea cultures are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Japanese tea culture focuses on meditation and ritual, while Indian tea culture focuses on socializing and daily life. Chinese and British tea cultures are somewhere in between, with Chinese tea culture being closer to Japanese and British tea culture being closer to Indian. Stanleykswong (talk) 11:40, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

::We have articles on Tea culture (see also Chado aka "Teaism"), Coffee culture, and on Yerba mate. If there is not a word embracing all of these (and other) non-alcoholic beverage-related cultural phenomena, perhaps there ought to be. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.81.243 (talk) 14:37, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Coffee, tea and yerba mate are the world's three most popular naturally caffeinated drinks.^{[https://books.google.com/books?id=2pb7EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA2&dq=%22third-most+popular+naturally+caffeinated+drink%22&hl=en]} What seems to be missing from our lexicon is a brief generic term for "naturally caffeinated drink".  ​‑‑Lambiam 15:59, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Yes, there is no common name for caffeinated beverages. But generally, people would classify tea, coffee, and sometimes yerba mate as caffeinated beverages. In fact, other plant seeds, such as guarana and kola nuts, have higher caffeine content. Why are they not widely accepted as caffeinated beverages by most people? Stanleykswong (talk) 16:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

::Japanese "high culture" of tea focuses on ritual, but in everyday life "precision and beauty" aren't a large factor in tea drinking in Japan, where it is simply the most common unsweetened drink. Likewise the idea of a matcha latte is unthinkable in high culture but relatively common in daily life. I'm not sure whether the original question intends to limit the conversation to high culture or not, but we are more likely to have articles about ritualized practices than everyday uses. Dekimasuよ! 06:00, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Yes, you are right, everyday drinks are different from Tea Ceremony (Chado). Busy urbanites may not have time to practice Chado, and all they need is a simple cup of tea or coffee to wake them up in the morning or help digest lunch. In this case, bottled tea or coffee sold in street corner vending machines can meet their needs well. Stanleykswong (talk) 07:16, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Apropos of nothing in particular, I'll place a general reminder here to review WP:LLMTALK. Dekimasuよ! 08:07, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

So, what I was meaning: is there a term that includes tea culture, coffee culture, alcohol culture, and everything else, including V8 and the cola wars? Looking for the word suggested or wished-for by the IP response, if it exists. Nyttend (talk) 23:39, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:A term in (relatively rare^{[https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=drinking+culture,coffee+culture,tea+culture,mate+culture,beverage+culture&year_start=1980&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3&hl=en]}) use is beverage culture:

:*{{tq|Coffee, with its rich aroma and stimulating qualities, is a cornerstone of beverage culture worldwide.}}^{[https://books.google.com/books?id=6MdDEQAAQBAJ&pg=PA49&dq=Coffee,+with+its+rich+aroma+and+stimulating+qualities,+is+a+cornerstone+of+beverage+culture+worldwide.&hl=en]}

:*{{tq|Japan's beverage culture is deeply intertwined with its culinary traditions.}}^{[https://books.google.com/books?id=nVtNEQAAQBAJ&pg=PA123&dq=%22Japan's+beverage+culture+is+deeply+intertwined+with+its+culinary+traditions.%22&hl=en]}

:*{{tq|To understand the place of tea drinking in the Buddhist monastery and in society more generally, we need to widen our scope from looking at monastic tea rituals so as to understand Song–dynasty beverage culture as a whole.}}^{[https://books.google.com/books?id=9VgEEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA130&dq=%22To+understand+the+place+of+tea+drinking+in+the+Buddhist+monastery+and+in+society+more+generally,+we+need+to+widen+our+scope+from+looking+at+monastic+tea+rituals+so+as+to+understand+Song-dynasty+beverage+culture+as+a+whole.%22&hl=en]}

: ​‑‑Lambiam 12:59, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

In the film Zulu Dawn, Burt Lancaster portrays Anthony Durnford with what he probably thought was an Irish accent. Do we know what sort of accent Durnford actually had? He was, it is true, born in Co. Leitrim, but his family were not Irish and he was brought up largely in Germany. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 21:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

:If it's documented, the best place to look would be in the two books by his *ahem* close friend Frances Colenso in which he is apparently central. Being also a British 'army brat', I think it most likely that it would be generic educated southern English, with an overlay of RP (such as it was in the mid-19th century), as would be expected of a Commissioned Officer and which his Father General E. W. Durnford likely also spoke. There are several other British Military Durnfords listed at Durnford; they seem to be generally from the Southern portion of England, and some may be related in ways absent from our articles, and related to Anthony Durnford. This is of course all speculation. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.81.243 (talk) 10:06, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

= June 10 =

What was Matthiessen's later opinion of the CIA? Did he ever stop working for the CIA, or claim to stop working for it? Did he regret working for them, have remorse for deceiving people about the Partisan Review? I realize he was a reporter, probably not involved in counterintelligence, but did he assassinate anyone while working for it, or know about assassinations because he worked for the cia? In any case, what happened to his reputation? Are his nonfiction books still trusted?Rich (talk) 12:47, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:Given the nature of Intelligence agencies, I think it's unlikely that most of these questions will have answers that have ever been revealed.

:Most intelligence work, to the extent of my knowledge, boils down to information gathering and analysis; I suspect only a very few employees (of whom there have been many) of any Intelligence Agencies have been called upon to assassinate anyone, and such operations would not be routinely known to most of their more humdrum colleagues.

:I don't see why his having worked for the CIA would have any bearing on his non-fiction books, except where (if at all) they might have impinged on matters related to US intelligence; about those he might have chosen to, or been obliged to, be less than open, but the same would apply to almost any writer whether a former IA employee or not, and readers should always be aware of this factor. See, perhaps, Covert operation. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.81.243 (talk) 18:32, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

::I asked that because the CIA was newer and smaller back then. Could have been much more casual, based on relationships. If we want to know what the CIA was willing to stoop to back then, we should examine the lives of wellknown agents.Rich (talk) 02:07, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

You would need to discover a nexus between his work in one area with another. For example, what does The Snow Leopard have to do with the CIA? If there a pattern of nexuses then OK. But making aspersion-like questions "Are his nonfiction books still trusted?" and "Did he assassinate anyone" without evidence is odd. Simply working for the CIA doesn't make him a bad person who broadly can't be trusted. -- GreenC 19:51, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:::I somewhat disagree. A journalist with an agenda is ok to me, but a journalist with a hidden agenda isn't right. And if a book of his like The Snow Leappard had something to do with his cia work, it would make me distrust what he wrote in it. But even if it didn't have anything to udo with his cia work, I would keep in mind he wasn't completely trustworthy about his reporting as a cia agent before, for reasons. How do I know if different reasons won't make him dishonest in The Snow Leopard? Rich (talk) 23:46, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Also Matthiessen misled some sincere journalists and philosophers who contributed to Partisan Review, not knowing what was up. That's a lot of work they put in.Rich (talk) 23:50, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::Two magazines are being conflated here. Paris Review (the magazine that Matthiessen co-founded and worked at briefly) and the Partisan Review are entirely different publications although both had CIA connections at points during their long histories. Cullen328 (talk) 06:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::And the Paris Review was (and is) a perfectly legitimate literary magazine, otherwise it would not have worked as a cover, so the work of other contributors was not 'wasted': the fact that one of its several founders was a CIA agent does not invalidate it or what it published then.

:::::You seem to think that someone who was at one point a CIA (or other IA) operative forever contaminates everything they touch – the World is not like that. Nor is covert activity in the service and interests of one's country necessarily a bad thing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.81.243 (talk) 10:33, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

The last sentence in Wayne Rosing reads:

:In 2010, he partially endowed a professor in theoretical astrophysics at the University of California, Santa Barbara held by Lars Bildsten.{{Cite web |title= The Wayne Rosing, Simon and Diana Raab Chair in Theoretical Astrophysics |publisher= University of California, Santa Barbara |url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120524004744/https://www.kitp.ucsb.edu/outreach/giving/endowment/endowed-chairs/wayne-rosing-simon-and-diana-raab-chair-in-theoretical-astr |accessdate= April 24, 2024 }}

{{reflist-talk}}

This sentence doesn't make sense, to me, and I am not familiar enough with academic credentials to try and clarify it. -- GreenC 19:44, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

: I'd read that to mean "he partially endowed a chair in theoretical astrophysics". But US-speak often goes to incomprehensible places, so I dunno. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:31, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

::I'd interpret this as a typo for he partially endowed a professorate. The cited source speaks of the "Wayne Rosing, Simon and Diana Raab Chair in Theoretical Astrophysics", so the endowment was made by Rosing and the Raabs. See endowed chair if this isn't familiar to you. Nyttend (talk) 00:13, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:::Curiously, the edit adding this info had the edit summary "(endowed a chair) ".

:::I have changed the wording to, "he co-endowed a chair".  ​‑‑Lambiam 10:18, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

= June 11 =

An IP editor says that Al Scates, an American former volleyball player and coach, was born on June 13, not June 9 as we currently have it. I have asked for a source, but can anyone here find one, please? It would be nice to fix this for the gentleman's upcoming 86th birthday. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:55, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:The video from UCLA's YouTube account, used as a reference in the article, states that he was born on June 13. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 00:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

= June 12 =