Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/HWP:RD/H

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

December 21

Why was the F-14 not good enough?

The F-15 was developed to match the expected performance of the MiG-25. But why was the F-14 not perceived as good enough for the task? F-15 article states: "The Air Force in-fighting was eventually ended by the worry that the Navy's VFAX would be forced on them; in May 1968, it was stated that 'We finally decided – and I hope there is no one who still disagrees – that this aircraft is going to be an air superiority fighter'." But this is not actually a reason. At least, Iran preferred the F-14 over the F-15... --KnightMove (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See https://www.navygeneralboard.com/f-14-vs-f-15-tomcat-vs-eagle/?amp=1

The F-15 was faster and more agile.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 18:42, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! --KnightMove (talk) 06:09, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The F-15 had a top speed of Mach 2.7, which was slower than the MiG-25's Mach 2.83. The F-15 was indeed more agile. Stanleykswong (talk) 23:36, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was comparing it to the F-14.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 05:04, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The MiG-23 is superior to the F-14 in many specifications, but in terms of actual performance, despite the MiG-23 having higher acceleration and better short-range missiles, the F-14 has demonstrated superior close-range air combat capabilities. Stanleykswong (talk) 08:36, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the conversation was about the F-14 vs F-15. What attributes of the latter led to it being selected instead of the former. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 17:24, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The F-14 was the Navy’s response to the failure of the F-111B. It was in essence what the F111B should have been. It was a bomber killer. MiG-25s posed no threat at all to the Navy, so the F-14 was never expected to deal with one. It was a missile carrier, designed around the Navy-specific Phoenix, which the Air Force did not procure. The Air Force didn’t need a heavy, expensive single purpose interceptor optimized for a heavy, expensive weapons system designed to defeat bombers as far as possible from the fleet. That Iran bought F-14s had more to do with salesmanship than any operational requirement. They didn’t need a naval interceptor designed for carrier operations. The Air Force didn't want a repeat of the F-111 experience either and wanted an agile air superiority fighter that could engage Russian fighters and fighter-bombers over land in Europe, not an ninterceptor that could withstand carrier operations. And by the way, the MiG-23 was, apart from raw speed, a terrible airplane. Acroterion (talk) 18:00, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The F-15 was developed eight years after the MiG-25. Therefore, people expected the F-15 to match or surpass the MiG-25 in all aspects, and it did, except for top speed and altitude. Stanleykswong (talk) 23:32, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The F-14 was designed as a specialized interceptor to carry Phoenix missiles and was not easily adapted to other roles when the threat of Russian fleet attacks diminished, it was big, complicated, and twice as expensive to operate per hour as an F-18, it’s replacement, and needed new engines. Acroterion (talk) 12:15, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 22

Shorelines in naval architecture

From transport in Antarctica:

Offshore anchorage is sparse and intermittent, but poses no problem to sailboats designed for the ice, typically with lifting keels and long shorelines.

In this context, what is a shoreline, and do we have an article about it? Nothing relevant at shoreline (disambiguation), and Google results are mostly about boats from companies named Shoreline and some shallow-water boats, but nothing relevant. Nyttend (talk) 02:44, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~The way I interpret it, it's just badly phrased; the sailboats have lifting keels, and long shorelines simply describes the terrain.~~ Clarityfiend (talk) 08:21, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of waterline but I have no idea whether a longer or shorter waterline is better in ice... Anyway, the subclause was introduced in this edit in 2007, unsourced. Where does "poses no problem" come from, how is that consistent with "intermittent"? Why the restriction to "sailboats"? I say delete. --Wrongfilter (talk) 08:43, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to the OED a shoreline is "A rope connecting a boat, fishing net, etc., with the shore". --Antiquary (talk) 09:44, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That makes more sense than my guess. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:17, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So if you use one of these, is that still offshore anchorage? --Wrongfilter (talk) 18:39, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if the shoreline is long enough. :) ‑‑Lambiam 20:16, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Author of Merry, Merry, Christmas

The author of Merry, Merry Christmas is usually given as "Mrs. Thomas J. Cook" or Rebecca S. Hook. So can we assume that Rebecca was the wife of a Thomas J. Cook, and her husband was named instead of herself, maybe for a generally low regard of women as creators of art at the time? --KnightMove (talk) 06:08, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was the standard in days of yore in all phases of life, not just the arts. The wife was considered an adjunct of the husband. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:24, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In higher ranks of society, no woman who (for example) married The Duke of X objected to being called The Duchess of X. In an era and culture where a woman remaining unmarried often meant a lifetime of hardship or ignominy (i.e. living off poorly paid, lowly work, or becoming a prostitute), having obtained the status and relative security of being a man's wife was something to advertise. Times and customs change. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 19:39, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not certain that Mrs Thomas J Cook and Rebecca S Cook are the same person. DuncanHill (talk) 19:54, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right, the confusion originates from contemporary hymnals like Hymns of Praise with Tunes (1884), Songs for Little Folks (1875) or Hymnal for Primary Classes (1896), where both names are mentioned as authors — a form you would usually expect if two different persons are involved. It is most likely that both names here refer to the same person, but a rest of insecurity remains. FordPrefect42 (talk) 22:29, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An 1871 publication has, "Words and Music by Mrs. T. J. COOK."^[1] This version is not entirely identical to that of 1875 in Songs for Little Folks. The lyrics are identical, as is the melodic line of the music, but the chords in the final six bars of this twenty-bar song have some significant differences. For example, in the 1871 version the first two beats of bar 15 have F♯DCE and F♯DBD (note the abundance of dissonances in the first chord, and the second, being a minor chord, not fitting the joyful mood), while in the 1875 version they have GCGE and GBGD. One might now think that the double attribution gives credit to a chord fixer next to the original composer, the single one given credit in 1871. But this is excluded by the second attribution being "Mrs. R. S. C. 1870." Both the year and the final initial, C rather than H, should tell us that the observed duplicity in the attributions is caused by confusion about the identity of a single yet polyonymous individual, not by a multiplicity of involved creators. ‑‑Lambiam 14:49, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lupin III Part 2: Episode 89

Initiated via block evasion. LTA.

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

In this episode, Lupin uses the music of Beethoven's Eroica to not starting a nuclear reactor. Is that possible in the real-life? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2025-42311-25 (talk) 17:06, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It might be theoretically possible to build mechanisms that function as described, but of course no-one ever has or ever would actually do so. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 19:42, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any detailed sources? ~2025-42087-34 (talk) 22:15, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, of course not. I am now straining to continue assuming your good faith. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 16:26, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have hundreds of times not started a nuclear reactor without any musical accompaniment. —Antonissimo (talk) 02:57, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

... and your life is all the poorer for it. :( Try, next time when not starting a nuclear reactor, to regale yourself with any of many equally appropriate and magnificent pieces, such as the grand finale of the 1812 Overture, or La Grande Porte de Kiev. ‑‑Lambiam 13:35, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it doesn't matter. Thank you anyway. ~2025-42581-83 (talk) 17:00, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst correlation does not imply causality, it may be noted that Bach, Beethoven and Brahms never kicked off a single nuclear reactor. As a matter of erroneous fact, Ludwig van, who lived two houses away in summer 1803 (composing bits of the Eroica, mentioned above), never cared about nuclear fusion nor fission whilst being a grumpy neighbour making pianistic noises. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:32, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But in that episode case the music was only a registration used to eliminate any rumor in order to not activate the nuclear reactor which was used as anti-theft. I've asked if that trick is possible in the real-life. You can see that episode for more info. ~2025-42548-91 (talk) 22:06, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yah, @Lambiam:, but have you ever heard Nikolai Golovanov conduct the Soviet version of the 1812 overture? Cue unhappy priests. I have an original red-coloured A.R.C pressing of the whole work (1st rec. 1963), recorded at 33 rpm (but looks like a 45 for the unwary.) Golovanov would be one of my favorite conductors, his early 78s are great: but his tendency towards vast self-indulgence leaves the way clear for Mravinsky. MinorProphet (talk) 17:34, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 24

FDNY Commissioner

It seems that some people are upset that Zohran Mamdani is making a non-firefighter the new FDNY Commissioner, comparing the case with Laura Kavanagh. But Tucker, the current commissioner, also wasn't a firefighter. And if the commissioner has subordinates who were firefighters, then what, precisely, is the complaint? Is this a political issue or a real concern? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 01:14, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the same people complained similarly about the appointment of Tucker, their grumbling is probably not motivated by allegiance to a political tribe. But the position that, as a matter of policy, the head of a fire department should emerge from the rank and file, while party-neutral, is nevertheless also political. ‑‑Lambiam 09:27, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 25

Podevin

Hi all, merry Christmas!

Having reworked the Dutch article nl:Good King Wenceslas (en: Good King Wenceslas) I encountered the lemma about Podevin (Podiven, Podiwin), the king's page. The text doesn't discuss his historicity, leaving the reader with the impression that a person with this name and role has actually existed. However, the given sources are weak and don't warrant this assumption. According to a better source, he is mentioned fifty years after Wenceslas' death in a 982 text^[1] but this was a hagiography, not a chronicle. I am not aware of any material evidence of Podevin's existence or name. A grave alongside the king is mentioned here and there, but that doesn't prove much. Herman Kølln (cited above) writes:

[The author] Christian tells two miracle stories also featuring Wenceslas' sister Pribyslava, and he is even able to expand on the miracle story Crescente fide that mentions the faithful servant for the first time. As in the Wolfenbüttel manuscript he bears the name Podiven. This tale —like that about Saint Ludmila— can be considered a short legend embedded within a longer legend.^[2]

Not being a native English speaker and unfamiliar with preferences and procedures at enwiki I am not prepared to initiate a discussion about the best way forward, but I will contribute if necessary. Personally, I would prefer to remove the text and redirect the article to Good King Wenceslas, mentioning his name and perhaps his role as a sidekick in Bohemian narratives.

Kind regards

^ Kølln, Herman (2019-06-21). "Die Wenzelslegende des Mönchs Christian" (PDF) (in German). p. 41. Retrieved 2025-12-22.
^ In German^{p. 16}: Christian erzählt zwei Wunderberichte, in denen auch Wenzels Schwester Pribyslava auftritt, und er kann sogar in einem Wunderbericht von dem in Crescente fide zum ersten Mal erwähnten treuen Diener weiteres erzählen. Der Diener tritt hier wie in der Wolfenbüttler Handschrift unter dem Namen Podiven auf. Seine Erzählung von Podiven kann wie im Falle der hl. Ludmila als eine kurze Legende, die in eine längere Legende eingeschaltet ist, betrachtet werden.

→bertux 09:36, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the text ", according to legend," with a reference to Kølln. This appears to be a much easier remedy than reworking our article Good King Wenceslas so as to mention the term "Podevin" in a meaningful way but without undue attention, which would be needed before creating a redirect. ‑‑Lambiam 15:36, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I am fine with your solution →bertux 17:22, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 27

Camus quote

Albert Camus is credited with the saying "I love my country too much to be a nationalist".

But in tracking down its source, I discovered that this wasn't what he said, exactly. In the Preface to Resistance, Rebellion, and Death (aka Lettres à un ami allemand, or Letters to a German Friend; 1961), he wrote:

To repeat a remark that is not mine, I love my country too much to be a nationalist. (my bolding)

In other words, he is explicitly denying his own authorship. So, who originated it? My searches have produced nothing. Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:24, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Me neither. The original French text from the Italian edition is:[2] "Pour reprendre un mot qui ne m'appartient pas, j'aime trop mon pays pour être nationaliste." But searching for "j'aime trop..." -Camus gets no useful hits. Likewise in German, nothing helpful for "Ich liebe mein Land zu sehr, um Nationalist zu sein" -Camus, or Spanish "Amo demasiado a mi país como para ser nacionalista", nor Italian "Amo troppo il mio paese per essere nazionalista" nor even Hungarian "Túlságosan szeretem a hazámat ahhoz, hogy nacionalista legyek." Maybe our Albert was paraphrasing the original words? A scholarly editorial commentary might suggest a clue, but Lettres à un ami allemand (1983) in Oeuvres complètes edited by Roger Grenier is not available on Archive.org, and I haven't been able to trace any online copy of the latest version, Oeuvres complètes. II : 1944-1948 ed. Jacqueline Lévi-Valensi. MinorProphet (talk) 16:13, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can search archive.org books even if you can't borrow them. That way you can read the pages that include your search term. E.g., in this case searching for "nationaliste" you can see page 17 with the quote. Unfortunately, there is no explanatory footnote. Long is the way (talk) 17:40, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, top tip! Thanks very much. Using the search for "lettre", there are brief introductory notes by Grenier on pp. 13-14, but nothing relevant to Jack of Oz's query. MinorProphet (talk) 19:54, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The remark may have only been a spoken one, said to Camus directly, or reported indirectly. He may have been the first to actually write it in a published work. Perhaps he asked the coiner "I like that, may I borrow it" and was told "By all means, but don't mention my name." (A politician, for example, might not have wanted to be credited with something that could be twisted against them.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 18:20, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Authors named as having earlier expressed the same or similar notions are Charles Péguy and Marc Bloch.^[3] ‑‑Lambiam 22:43, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The piece you link mentions those two writers (only) as follows [in auto-translation]:

"Universalism deprived of anchoring is as sterile as a particularism indifferent to universal values. It is in this sense that authors like Charles Péguy or Marc Bloch [my links] spoke of the 'two vocations' of the French homeland."

According to a web search (which may be confidently incorrect):

"The 'two vocations of the French homeland' refers to a[n] historical concept that France's primary callings or purposes were essentially Catholic and royalist."

I am not seeing a close relevance to Camus' aphorism here, and certainly not what I would recognise as "the same or similar notions", although Péguy's and Bloch's actual words (did we but know them) might be more apposite. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 01:26, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you all for your researches and ideas. It seems that either (a) Camus came up with it himself but thought it couldn't possibly have been original [‡] ; or (b) he knew it was original but was using poetic licence to make it scan better; or (c) someone else really did say it in his earshot - maybe his second cousin, maybe a stranger at a pub, whatever - but the details weren't worth going into when making his statement; it was sufficient to deny his own authorship.
We'll never know now.
[‡] The Mario Puzo syndrome: The first time I heard the sentence "I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse", it didn't seem all that memorable because I would have bet $$$ I'd heard it many times before. But intrepid quote investigators of the utmost fame all swear that it made its very first appearance in that exact form in The Godfather (novel) (1969), although Balzac wrote something similar in 1835. I wonder whether Puzo himself was prey to his own syndrome. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:00, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

de Gaulle quotation

I am looking for the source of "Le patriotisme, c'est aimer son pays. Le nationalisme, c'est détester celui des autres." I have seen this attributed to his Lettres, notes et carnets: 1951. Wikiquote has the similar "Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first" which it says is "Attributed to de Gaulle by Romain Gary, Life, May 9, 1969. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 18:17, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At least the Life magaxine source is available online; it says the statement was made in an after dinner speech but nothing so useful as when or where :) [4]~2025-43410-48 (talk) 23:41, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 28

Figures of people serving

US ŴWÌI personnel in uniform total № DMc75771 (talk) 22:33, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"ŴWÌI"? Anyway, it looks like the figure is over 16 million.[5] This is the website that came up when I googled "how many americans served in ww2". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:41, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16,112,566 (unsourced), according to Military history of the United States during World War II. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:33, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DMc75771; that exact figure is quoted by the National Museum of American History, the George C. Marshall Foundation (in a lecture by Rick Atkinson) and finally the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Alansplodge (talk) 13:21, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clarityfiend; I have added the DofVA ref to the article. Alansplodge (talk) 13:37, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thank you all for your help DMc75771 (talk) 15:10, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 29

Bell-ringing: 67th Canon

In the context of bell-ringing in Christian (Church of England) churches, what is the "67th Canon", referred to twice in page 94 of "Notes and Collections Relating to the Parish of Aldridge, in the County of Stafford", Part II? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:13, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Canon 67 is quoted in this here book. It belongs to the ecclesiastical law of the church of England. See also here (scroll down to LXVII). --Wrongfilter (talk) 13:26, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why does that number keep popping up? ---Sluzzelin talk 18:59, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frequency illusion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:53, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~6 7~! ‑‑Lambiam 23:17, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 31

politics of outer space

flag § Hoisting the flag
During the second inauguration of Donald Trump § Inaugural address (see United States presidential inauguration § Inaugural address for context on what kind of speech that is) the President said that American astronauts would "plant the stars and stripes on the planet Mars" (NYT,^[1] USA Today,^[2] Politico^[3]).

My question is: would erecting a flag someplace on Mars do anything legally that simply visiting said location wouldn't? Relatedly, has there been a legal framework underlying famous flag-planting in non-space contexts such as raising the Flag on Iwo Jima or on the Australian coastline, or were these simply patriotic but legally insignificant gestures? — Arlo James Barnes 06:49, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The 1967 Outer Space Treaty precludes any country from claiming sovereignty over outer space or any celestial body according to our article. The United States is a signatory. So, when US astronauts planted the US flag on the Moon in 1969, it had no significance as a legal claim and was essentially just a symbolic exercise of bragging rights and national pride. The same would apply to the US flag being planted on Mars should that happen. Raising a Flag over the Reichstag is another example of a dramatic but entirely symbolic flag raising, emblematic of the total defeat of Nazi Germany. — Cullen328 (talk) 08:30, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While the US is a party to the OST, they can simply pull out of the treaty, like they did with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, and declare that Mars is become US territory, destined to become the 54th State of the United States, after Venezuela, Greenland and Canada. —Lambiam 10:28, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There has been, recently, a POTUS who has claimed sovereignty over Canada and Greenland without exiting any treaties which recognise Canada or Denmark as sovereign states. Possibly, the culture of international diplomacy has changed. — Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:43, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But what was the international order like before, at peak colonialism or imperialism? Why have formalisms like treaties at all if the name of the game is conquest? And if planting a flag isn't equivalent to making a territorial claim, why is there a persistent trope in popular culture that it is? Maybe there aren't satisfying answers but these are the kinds of things I wonder about anyway. — Arlo James Barnes 19:49, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Before the United Nations banned international recognition of siezing territory by force, flag raising was a symbolic aspect of conquest, but the territorial claim needed to be defended by military power to mean anything in the long run. Any ship could anchor off a remote area of another country's shoreline and raise a flag. But the flag raising was meaningless if the local navy promptly showed up and ousted the occupiers. Flag raising without effective military power meant nothing. Cullen328 (talk) 20:05, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As for treaties, they usually recognized de facto realities on the ground, to end active conflict or reduce simmering hostilities between rival nations, or to build alliances. Cullen328 (talk) 20:11, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

References

Have look at the Fashoda Incident.--~2026-58421 (talk) 19:47, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lewes, Sussex, and vast green umbrellas on cane frames

In Lucas, E. V. (1904). "XXXV: Pevensey and Hurstmonceux". Highways and Byways in Sussex. Highways and Byways. London: Macmillan and Co. we read "Hurstmonceux is famous not only for its castle, but for its "trugs," the wooden baskets that gardeners carry, which are associated with Hurstmonceux as crooks once were with Pyecombe, and the shepherds' vast green umbrellas, on cane frames, with Lewes." Now, I know about trugs and Pyecombe crooks, and I know Lewes well, but I've never heard of "the shepherds' vast green umbrellas, on cane frames" in connexion with it, or anywhere else for that matter. Can anyone help? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 19:05, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shepherds Umbrellas are the large, almost parasol, style umbrellas that ended up being used for patios or (when made with metal ribs) termed 'Golf Umbrellas' in the UK now. They don't have a crook handle, instead using a straight one so that it can spin in the wind. Cane was used for the ribs instead of metal so they would be ok to use in lightning. Nanonic (talk) 20:17, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good thing lightning never strikes woody plants, such as trees. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:59, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Nanonic:. I've found reference to shepherds' umbrellas in French, from an inevitably-named French umbrella company, but still nothing to link them especially with Lewes. DuncanHill (talk) 00:03, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is an article on shepherds' umbrellas on p. 525 of an issue of The Sussex County Magazine from 1933.^[6] Perhaps it provides a historic link with Lewes. Or, maybe maybe, it is just the case that the landscape around Lewes was known for its shepherds in the days when shepherds used to stroll around with these umbrellas, which might be more conspicuous than their carriers. (Since Google Books has disabled the Classic view, my Google Books Fu has become equally disabled as Samson's after the haircut, so I can't tell if this article has any relevance.) ‑‑Lambiam 13:27, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That was what I was afraid the new year would bring, but in fact I still have Classic view so my Google Books Fu remains unsheared and mighty. The article "Shepherds' Umbrellas" in the volume of Sussex County Magazine you link to begins "To meet a shepherd carrying one of the large old-fashioned umbrellas is already unusual, and such a sight will become worthy of remark by ramblers...". It says at one point that "When interviewing Michael Blann [a shepherd and songwriter from Upper Beeding, Sussex] I spoke of big umbrellas, and he said, 'Once I had one with me when I walked miles home from Lewes in a storm of rain and wind. A gust got under it and blew it to bits, so I threw it in the ditch...'". Shepherding was once a common occupation not just around Lewes but along the whole of the Sussex Downs. The church at the above-mentioned Pyecombe still bills itself as the Shepherds' Church. --Antiquary (talk) 16:25, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(ec with Antiquary) @Lambiam: Thank you - I managed to persuade Google Books to show me an extract of the article, which is called "Shepherds' Umbrellas" by Barclay Wills. "To meet a shepherd carrying one of the large old-fashioned umbrellas is already unusual, and such a sight will become worthy of remark by ramblers, for although these useful" - and there the glimpse ends. But, Barclay Wills is a name known to me, as an author on Sussex. I believe his collection of artefacts is in Worthing Museum, which I shall endeavour to visit when it re-opens. Anyway, in his book The Downland Shepherds (an edited selection of various of his works) we find several mentions of umbrellas, and their use as shelter. They seem to have been made of some sort of thornproof, as a shepherd would back into a bush with his open umbrella behind him to form a shelter. As to Lewes and the colour of them he says "The shepherd gave me an old black umbrella, bought at Lewes. He has had green ones, but those came from Storrington". More reading to do! DuncanHill (talk) 16:35, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Southdown Sheep (p98) has "Shepherd Michael Blann of Patching, who had died three years earlier at the age of 90, was remembered by his beautiful horn lantern and other implements included a shepherd’s umbrella more than four feet in diameter when open, a Pyecombe marking iron, trailing-irons from Sompting, wooden and iron shackles, a home-made wooden thatching needle and a Goring dirt-knocker which was used to remove caked mud from ewes’ fleeces."

The origin of the umbrella is not specified, but other locations seem to be known for specific items. -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 17:54, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Blann is mentioned in our article Music of Sussex. For more information about him see here. DuncanHill (talk) 00:38, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

January 1

Pentagon Papers publishing

Anyone who's read much of anything about early 1970s US politics knows that the New York Times published the Pentagon Papers, triggering significant controversy and a SCOTUS case. In what form were they published by the Times? The Pentagon Papers article notes that it's a 47-volume collection, so obviously they weren't just published in the newspaper's regular pages. Unfortunately, Pentagon Papers#Start of publication talks only about the Times publishing summaries, and not about the original documents. Nyttend (talk) 10:18, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The proper sense of "Pentagon Papers" is the report by the "Vietnam Task Force, Office of the Secretary of Defense" entitled United States–Vietnam relations 1945–1967, being the output of a secret study on American involvement in Vietnam commissioned by McNamara, comprising 47 volumes, classified as TOP SECRET — SENSITIVE. What the Times published were excerpts of this report, selected by Daniel Ellsberg for showing conclusively that the administration was lying to Congress and the public. The actual Pentagon Papers are now declassified and have been made available in 2011 by the National Archive in cooperation with the presidential libraries of Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon. They can be downloaded from https://www.archives.gov/research/pentagon-papers and also be accessed from https://archive.org/details/thepentagonpapers/Pentagon-Papers-Index/. At the time, a small number of copies was printed. I do not know if they are currently available in print. ‑‑Lambiam 12:56, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

January 2

Building owner

The Trump Tower article says that the building's owner is GMAC Commercial Mortage. Does that mean they're what we would usually call a building owner, i.e. someone who could sell the building if they chose to, could remodel it, and all that stuff? Or they just a lien holder like with an ordinary mortgage, so the deed has their name on it but they can't do much of anything with it as long as the monthly payments keep arriving? Just wondering, heh heh. Thanks. ~2026-27808 (talk) 10:19, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No. GMAC (and successors) are just listed for legal purposes. The building itself is owned by multiple people and organizations. No single person can sell the entire building any more than when you mortgage a house, the bank can't just sell your house and remodel it without your agreement. ~2026-29536 (talk) 12:24, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

January 3

Name of an argument or fallacy

Person A is appointed to a very prestigious high-profile position, but their background doesn't seem to merit it, and the appointment attracts severe criticism from Person B.
Person A does very well in the position and is handsomely rewarded. Rather than acknowledging this undeniable fact, Person B then says that the position was not really very important anyway; or has become less than relevant/important due to Person A's stewardship.

What's this type of about-face called? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:47, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A variation on 'Sour grapes'? See that article's section Cognitive dissonance. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 08:10, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever it is called, it is IMO no more a fallacy (or even an argument) than bullying is. Person B might as well say that Person A's mommy is so fat that ... . ‑‑Lambiam 11:24, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It also seems like a cousin to "Moving the goalposts". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:18, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fashoda

Fashoda, so we are told in Fashoda Incident, was founded by the Egyptian Army in 1855 and in Kodok we are told "In 1904, the development of the Anglo-French Entente Cordiale prompted the British to change the town's name to Kodok (Kothok) in the hope of obliterating the memory of the incident". The source used to support that actually says "Even the word ‘Fashoda’ was erased from the map, and the place was known henceforth by its Shilluk name of Kodok." after discussing Cromer's 1908 memoirs. So, what does Fashoda mean, and why was it chosen as the place-name, what does Kodok mean, and when exactly was the name changed and by whom?> Thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 20:25, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Our article Shilluk Kingdom asserts that Fashoda, far from being "founded by the Egyptian Army in 1855", was the capital of said kingdom "from the late 17th century." An unreliable search engine AI reply suggests that the name in the Shilluk language means something like "heart of their kingdom", for what that's worth.

The same unreliable AI suggests that Kodok 'signifies a spiritually significant site for the Shilluk people of South Sudan, acting as a sacred place for divine communication, spiritual healing, and a center for their kingdom, rather than having a simple translation like "a big rock . . ." (and of course our article, which you linked, goes into some detail about Kodok's history and nature). These returns might provide clues to search for more reliable (and citable) sources.

What all this suggests to me is that Fashoda was the publicly known administrative capital's name, Kodok was that of the adjacent or contiguous 'secret' spiritual capital, and that suppression of the former name by the British colonial authorities (in order to reduce diplomatic and public emnity between Britain and France) brought the latter into use as an obvious substitute – but of course I'm guessing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 23:30, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

January 4

[:0-1] Kølln, Herman (2019-06-21). "Die Wenzelslegende des Mönchs Christian" (PDF) (in German). p. 41. Retrieved 2025-12-22.

[2] In German^{p. 16}: Christian erzählt zwei Wunderberichte, in denen auch Wenzels Schwester Pribyslava auftritt, und er kann sogar in einem Wunderbericht von dem in Crescente fide zum ersten Mal erwähnten treuen Diener weiteres erzählen. Der Diener tritt hier wie in der Wolfenbüttler Handschrift unter dem Namen Podiven auf. Seine Erzählung von Podiven kann wie im Falle der hl. Ludmila als eine kurze Legende, die in eine längere Legende eingeschaltet ist, betrachtet werden.

[3] "What Trump's Pledge to Plant the U.S. Flag on Mars Really Means". New York Times.

[4] "Trump wants to 'plant the Stars and Stripes' on Mars". USA Today.

[5] "Trump pledges to send astronauts to Mars". Politico.

[1]

[2]

[1]

[2]

[3]