Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Reference desk

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Grey Geezer (talk | contribs) at 11:46, 2 November 2017 (→What painting is this from?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
skip to bottom
Select a section:
Shortcut
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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


Ready? Ask a new question!


How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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


October 28

Declaration of Independence of Catalonia

There are lots of things I don't understand about the current situation in Catalonia.

1) Was the Declaration of Independence in response to Section 110 or vice versa? I've seen sources imply either, though I think it is fairly agreed-on that the declaration came first. Was this some kind of mutual causality?

2) What is the point of making the Declaration first? I mean, if you're going to declare what will be called an illegitimate country, why rush to do it in a legitimate regional congress?

3) Why did the opposition walk out? It sounded like they were not far from getting a majority, and with legislators worried about being prosecuted to vote the wrong way, it seems like it would have been possible to get last minute defectors.

4) Does Catalonia have an army, weapons, fortifications, or a battle plan of any kind? It seems like they have a moderately defensible border with a lot of river boundaries, but are they taking any effort to secure it?

5) Above all, what is the rationale of Catalan pro-independence legislators and voters? I am seeing pretty one-sided coverage against them -- what is their thought process? How do they hope to surpass or even maintain the level of autonomy they had pre-referendum? Wnt (talk) 19:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Catalans likely wanted to declare independence before the Spanish decree abolishing the region's autonomy was passed, to give it additional legitimacy, but the situation now is more political than legal. Since the Spanish state doesn't want to negotiate and the Catalans don't want to back down on their quest for independence, it will come down to who can make the reality on the ground conform to its vision of what is happening. In other words, Spain has suspended Catalonia's autonomy, but if a Catalan government continues to function in spite of this, the law doesn't mean much. Similarly, if the Catalan government cannot demonstrate a minimum of control over its territory, its declaration of independence will be meaningless and eventually become simply a historical curiosity. The problem at this point is that no one can say with any degree of confidence how things will turn out: how much force will Spain be willing to exert to demonstrate the Catalan declaration is ineffectual? If the vast majority of the population supports independence, as appears to be the case, it's going to be very difficult for Spain to reassert its rule in the face of massive demonstrations and civil disobedience. But the population could also get over its initial enthusiasm for independence and not oppose much resistance to Spain's efforts to reassert control. No one knows how it will turn out at this point. One thing is certain though: your option 4 is a misreading of the situation: no one on either side wants a military confrontation and if it gets to that, it will be because both sides have played their hand terribly. What is the rationale (question 5)? the same as most nationalist movements: the Catalans feel the central government does not represent them correctly, impedes their development (economic, cultural or whatever) and consider they would be better off if they had complete control of their own destiny. If they do achieve independence, they would definitely surpass the level of autonomy they had before the referendum. There are also plenty of intermediate arrangements that could give Catalonia much greater government powers within Spain... if the two sides eventually agree to sit down and discuss things. The arrangement that existed pre-referendum gave Catalonia powers that were inferior to most constituent states of a federal government, so there was a lot to gain, potentially. But they could also lose everything. We'll see. Xuxl (talk) 20:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why force seemed relevant is, well, what else can stop the Spanish government from arresting all their officials and going into the banks to seize whatever accounts hold the regional budget, the local police force's pension plan, etc.? (Actually I don't understand much about how banks arrange to have their money considered "real" -- it's not clear to me the government can't just pick up a phone and essentially make the money theirs, or whatever bank holds it) If they are free to roam around taking whoever and whatever they want, they demonstrate the essence of governance.... Wnt (talk) 04:27, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There's a difference between asking police to enforce laws and raising the issue of military force and defensible borders and fortifications, which is what the OP mentioned in his point 4. --Xuxl (talk) 12:22, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
About point 4), the Catalans have the ability to set up alternative government systems in cyberspace, also the Catalans contribute a lot to the State finances via taxes, so they can just stop paying taxes to the Spanish government and instead pay taxes to their local government. Count Iblis (talk) 22:58, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Governments regularly seize assets with apparent ease; see U.S. Seizes Billions in Iraqi Assets (2003) and Spanish police seize property worth £590m from Assad family (April 2017). Perhaps we could confine ourselves to finding sources which give possible courses of action rather than just guessing? Alansplodge (talk) 09:10, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Such sources are welcome, but I have no idea how they generalize when the bank is physically located in a newly rebellious province. All of a sudden the philosophical question of "where" the bank's intangible currency is located becomes a practical question, one I have no idea how to answer. Wnt (talk) 14:40, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I just had another look at a news archive search; some moderately relevant sources are [1] (Considering a cryptocurrency) [2] (Caixabank and Sabadell have "left Catalonia", and "the stock market" has crashed; quote: "But the Catalans are much too sensible to try to take on the military might of the Spanish state. They will instead allow Madrid to tie itself in knots as it tries to take over and run the province. There will be passive resistance and there will be marches and strikes. If Spain prosecutes and imprisons Carles Puigdemont, as it has threatened to do, a dozen others will appear in his place. It's no easy matter to run a government when the various arms of the state, like the civil service, police, and judges, are unwilling agents. ") [3] (those two banks suffered huge stock losses).
Honestly, I still don't understand any of it. Starting a new cryptocurrency sounds like a great idea, but if it is, why wasn't it a great idea a month ago? Or better yet, a low-denomination bearer bond, perhaps in the form of a note or coin, that is backed by loans/bonds taken out by a region's small businesses (we ought to get one of these for America...) But --- most people involved with banks don't have a choice. I mean, either they have a pension fund or nest egg in the bank, which they might only be allowed to access if they are in good legal standing and swear loyalty to the King of Spain or something, or they have an outstanding loan that they might not dare to ignore out of hope that an independent Catalonia will forget about the international bourgeoisie, because what fine young republic ever does that? Which leaves ... a bunch of street demonstrations for independence, which they could have done before, with equally little result. If the Spanish get serious, the gold standard response is Sinicization of Tibet. Wnt (talk) 14:57, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 29

Firmament

Could somebody in the know have a quick look at this article, especially with regard to the last edit by Forestsoceansmusic included in the recent version? I think at least the introduction could do with a little overhaul, but I'm afraid I'm not well-versed enough in this subject.--Cleph (talk) 18:14, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I now have it on my watchlist. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:23, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good alert. My old church minister said the same thing about what the firmament meant, and he weren't no Catholic. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:44, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if we should move Forestsoceansmusic's referenced comment into a separate section, something like "Alternative interpretations"? There are a ton of sources on Google Books which confirm that the "solid bowl" concept was actually believed by the ancient Hebrews. Alansplodge (talk) 13:58, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 30

Ballad of an Intellectual

A discussion on another desk reminded me of one of my favorite E. E. Cummings poems, "Ballad of an Intellectual", for which my affection is admittedly not purely on the basis of literary merit. It's a sharp poke at the radical chic of his day.

We don't seem to have an article on the poem itself, and I was wondering if anyone could help me figure out a few things about some of the allusions.

  • First, can anyone figure out who the poem is about? I get a strong sense that Cummings had someone in particular in mind. A perfectly acceptable answer is, "no, there's no evidence that he was talking about anyone in particular",or perhaps "there's no one in particular for which there's evidence that he's the subject", which I suppose is a bit different if that's the case.
  • This couplet, [f]or whoso conniveth at Lenin his dream/shall dine upon bayonets,isn't and seam. Can anyone figure out "isn't and seam"? A fair number of the allusions seem to be sound-alikes, but "isn't and seam" doesn't sound like anything I can think of.
  • The line for if you're not bourgeois you're Eddie Gest. I think this might be Edgar Guest? But though Guest is described as "the people's poet", our article doesn't suggest that he was ever particularly political, and certainly never suggests he was a communist.

Thanks for any help! --Trovatore (talk) 04:41, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not much of a literary critic, but here and here are the offerings of Mr Google. Alansplodge (talk) 11:09, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the rhyming approaches Ogden Nash territory (though I doubt Ogden Nash would have ever taken Communism as a subject)... AnonMoos (talk) 12:31, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This Amazon customer review calls the Ballad "a sour jingle about sour communards". Alansplodge (talk) 13:56, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did anyone else notice that this poem is dated 1994, and old e.e. died in 1962? DOR (HK) (talk) 14:02, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per the footnote at the bottom of the poem: "From "e. e. cummings: Complete Poems 1904-1962: Revised, Corrected, and Expanded Edition Containing All the Published Poetry , " edited by George J. Firmage. (Liveright: $50). This is to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the birth of e. e. cummings (Oct. 14, 1894). 1994 Reprinted by permission."uhhlive (talk) 14:51, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The first link that I posted (www.lorenwebster) says the poem was "Written in 1932". Alansplodge (talk) 16:41, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone explain why this man's work is seen as more worthy, say, than the lyrics of the average garage band or doggerel from a high school journal? Honestly, I don't perceive it. Wnt (talk) 23:16, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Wnt: As I mentioned, I like this particular poem for reasons other than its pure value as literature, but in any case it is very atypical of Cummings's larger oeuvre. Maybe you knew that; maybe not. If you didn't, you might look up "anyone lived in a pretty how town" or "my father moved through dooms of love", and see if they move you more. (I can't get through either of them dry-eyed, but that might be just me.) --Trovatore (talk) 00:38, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The exploration of parts of speech in the second one is slightly more interesting, though aesthetically they fall on barren rock for me. But, the first of your cites also uses "isn't" as a noun, which seems like it might be relevant to answering the original question. Wnt (talk) 01:59, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I suppose it's possible, but "anyone" is a love story whereas "ballad" is a political critique, so I kind of doubt it's the same "isn't". If you can say more about your insight, though, I'd love to hear it — maybe I missed your point. --Trovatore (talk) 02:03, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm not sure the text really means very much, but I would guess "isn't" as a noun in both cases means essentially "a statement that it isn't my problem". In the "ballad" there are quotes with isn't as a verb to go by; in the other I infer this from "cared not at all". Wnt (talk) 02:10, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm — and then "seam"? I still want to read this as a sound-alike for something, but I'm blanking on what it sounds like. --Trovatore (talk) 02:16, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(By the way, I'm not sure I quite agree with your interpretation of "isn't" in "anyone". I think the point is that anyone and noone are authentic and active — he sings his didn't and dances his did; her character is developed more in terms of her love for him, but together they laugh their cryings and do their dance. The townspeople are not really living in the same way as noone and anyone; that's why they sow their isn't and reap their same. Then anyone and noone die, and the townspeople just go on.) --Trovatore (talk) 02:23, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I have no idea. But "seem" is an apparent homophone. Given the description of e.e. cummings as developing a strong dislike for Communism after seeing 1931 Russia, I'm not expecting anything friendly. Wnt (talk) 02:27, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, yeah, it could be just "seem", spelled to "rhyme" with the preceding "dream". I thought it was probably some more specific reference to some event or institution of the time, but maybe not. Yes, of course the poem is anti-communist; that's clear from beginning to end. --Trovatore (talk) 02:44, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The line is modeled after the nursery rhyme about "Curly Locks," who will feed upon strawberries, sugar and cream. No theory why cummings plugs in the words that he does, though. Herbivore (talk) 22:35, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thank you very much! I would never have gotten that. Actually I'm not sure I'm 100% convinced, but it looks plausible, and it would never have occurred to me. --Trovatore (talk) 22:55, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just a side note, as several respondents have lowercased Cummings's name: See E. E. Cummings#Name and capitalization. --Trovatore (talk) 22:59, 31 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

October 31

Circencester

I've run across a few references to "Circencester", in contexts that seem to mean "Cirencester". Is this an alternative spelling, or is there a subtle distinction? I haven't found any clear statement that they are the same. -- Elphion (talk) 15:59, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be nothing more than a spelling mistake, or a typo. It isn't an alternative name, and there is no other location of that name. Looking at the etymology of the name, none of the variant or historic forms give any indication that there has ever been a version with the extra c in it. Wymspen (talk) 18:33, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at that etymology in the article out of curiosity and it said "An early Welsh language ecclesiastical list from St David's gives another form of the name Caerceri where Caer is the Welsh for fortress and Ceri is cognate with the other forms of the name." Are you sure? Wnt (talk) 21:08, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Quite sure - the Welsh Caer (fort) corresponds to the Latin Castra (= -cester) and the Welsh Ceri is the same root as the Ciren- in the modern name. Nothing there to justify the third c. Wymspen (talk) 09:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2

Censorship [EDITED]

Is there any kind of articles that are not allowed on Wikipedia? 42.114.193.98 (talk) 05:31, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I asked because I wrote 3 times a question about why is Harvey Weinstein still free and it got deleted 3 times. 42.114.193.104 (talk) 07:27, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. Unsourced articles about any subject, or articles that are only sourced to fringe sources. See: Wikipedia:Fringe theories. Dimadick (talk) 06:01, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Censors are by their fundamental nature dishonest, and I've seen too many things here suppressed by crank arguments. I suppose we can separate these into the categories of things with no pretense of a legal basis (e.g. removal of scientific data showing liberals are smarter than conservatives) vs. things claiming a legal basis. Where a legal basis is claimed, usually it is copyright, which is the predominant form of censorship overall in society -- for example, the lone filibusterer on Wikisource who endlessly argues that an auction of some belongings from Ted Kaczinsky's cabin somehow retroactively revoked the public domain status of the Unabom Manifesto that had been published in the New York Times. He claims that so long as he continues to argue, the status is unclear, and to be safe of course nothing with unclear copyright should ever be published... The rarer case is something like the public-domain film from The Good Old Naughty Days, which some Wikipedians claim to be obscene though it is up for sale on Amazon. ([4]) I should run down these discussions but it is too lugubrious; besides they shouldn't be that hard to find. Wnt (talk) 06:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not exactly "censorship" ,but you might be interested in WP:NOT, which gives examples of things that are outside Wikipedia's purview and are therefore not allowed to prevent clutter.ApLundell (talk) 06:58, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The most recent deletion was done by Nil Einne citing Wikipedia's policy on publishing material about living persons, see WP:BLP. Of course the ref desk is not article space but apparently BLP also applies to talk pages, the relevant section is WP:BLPTALK. In my view the claim that the ref desk is a talk page is contentious at best, but that's another argument. The point is that I don't believe the question violates BLP. It is asking for legal information and as such should be able to be answered with reference to published sources. The OP's error was to ask the question in relation to a specific person, when the same information could be gleaned by depersonalizing the question so that it doesn't fall foul of BLP. I would rephrase the question along the lines of "If a prominent person is alleged to have committed sexual offences, what information does law enforcement need in order to be able to arrest them?" Advice to the OP: next time, if you don't want your question to be deleted for BLP reasons, couch it in general terms. --Viennese Waltz 07:46, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLP says right in the first sentence that it applies to every page in Wikipedia. I agree that refdesks are not exactly talk pages; some talk guidelines apply and some not so much, but BLP applies everywhere. --Trovatore (talk) 07:58, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Free availability of texts by B. Russell

An enormous body of texts by Bertrand Russell is available online. Who "abandoned" the copyright and where can this decision be found in writing? GEEZERnil nisi bene 07:37, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they are copyright violations and no one has ordered them to be taken down. Or maybe they aren't copyright violations at all. Without any specific example to go on, no one here can evaluate your question to give it a meaningful answer, since we have no evidence your suppositions are correct. Your question inherently contains the plurium interrogationum fallacy, famously the "When did you stop beating your wife?" problem. First, provide evidence to establish that your suppositions are true, THEN we can answer your second question. Until then, we don't even know the basis for your main question is meaningful. --Jayron32 10:42, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What painting is this from?

Can someone help me track down the painting from which the below image is an extract?

https://pixady.com/image/0imp/

(Note, I didn't want to upload the image to Wikipedia itself, so used a third party image hosting service for sake of ease).

Thanks in advance.

Discounttents (talk) 11:14, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is this is a painting or illustration about the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Compare the subject matter to some of the images here. I don't find your exact painting, but something about it (the canoes, the style of tent and dress, the giant Rocky Mountains like wall behind them) gives it that feel. --Jayron32 11:19, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It reminds me of naive paintings from Greenland. GEEZERnil nisi bene 11:46, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities&oldid=808358944"