Humanities desk
< August 11	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 13 >

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

August 12[edit]

How did Donald Trump and Mike Pence 1st meet?[edit]

I'm looking at both their articles and no mutual places. Pence was previously governor of Indiana and Trump did not work there. Did they not go to mutual college. Pence was working in Indiana most of his life. So how did those 2 get acquainted? And it seems when Trump offered Pence as his VP, they did not personally know each other much at that time either? 67.165.185.178 (talk) 00:31, 12 August 2021 (UTC).[reply]

This article says no later than April 2016. They were both at the 2011 CPAC. If one thinks about it, they could have met at any number of occasions, but probably at a large gathering where they were merely introduced. One would need to get into their papers, which would be easy if Trump had a Presidential Library. Abductive (reasoning) 07:24, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was accidentally thrown out in his departure from the White House. Pity, he hadn't even finished colouring in one of the two books. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:14, 12 August 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Lollipops, oranges, turtles and pearls[edit]

Greetings,

Many opponents of open skin and advocates of veil are seen to share many memes with comparison images exploiting human feeling of insecurity with Appeal to fear like Lollipops or sweets with flies, oranges skinned & peeled and turtle carapace, pearl with shell on Social media and even mainstream media and advertising in some countries.

I am looking for help in

1) More such examples

2) Copyright free images

3) Any reliable sources/ refs (both pro and against) discussing such images or memes.

4) Any psychology side scholarship discussing above stated human feeling of insecurity with Appeal to fear in such images &/or discourse .

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias are for expanding information and knowledge' (talk) 06:38, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, they try to say that exposure to sun and wind ages the skin, and use images of things other than skin? Abductive (reasoning) 07:06, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, wind makes skin dry and sun causes skin cancer, you know ! Actually using tortoise and houseflies memes is religiously contentious being images of living beings but while using image they must not be thinking so.

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias are for expanding information and knowledge' (talk) 07:23, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is outside my area of expertise. I would say that first you should make a list of search terms (key words), then search for them in Google, Google Scholar, and Google Books until you hit upon scholarly material that discusses the topic. Each time you search, you may find additional, better key words which you can add to the list. Abductive (reasoning) 08:07, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know, whenever I got stuck users on this board have helped me out many time previously so I keep coming back Thanks

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias are for expanding information and knowledge' (talk) 10:20, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More information about Bobrikov's assassination[edit]

Regarding my earlier question about how do we know the details about the assassination of Nikolay Bobrikov, I asked over at the Finnish Wikipedia and got a reply:

Hyvä kysymys. Murhaa kuvaillaan yksityiskohtaisesti muun muassa Seppo Zetterbergin Schauman-elämäkerrassa Viisi laukausta senaatissa ja Tuomo Polvisen Bobrikov-elämäkerrassa Valtakunta ja rajamaa. Kummassakin mainitaan, että Schaumanin kiiruhtaessa tähystyspaikaltaan pääportaikkoon häntä vastaan tuli käytävällä "tuttu senaatin virkamies", joka kysyi mihin hän oli menossa (Schauman vastasi: "En ehdi nyt"). Kummassakaan teoksessa ei mainita kenenkään olleen paikalla, kun Schauman kurkki ikkunasta, mutta ilmeisesti useakin henkilö näki muuten hänen liikkuvan Senaatintalossa. Lisäksi Zetterbergin kirjassa mainitaan, että Schauman kertoi pari viikkoa etukäteen yksityiskohtaisesti suunnitelmastaan aktivisti Lennart Hohenthalille, joka myös suunnitteli Bobrikovin murhaa (Schauman oli keskustelun aikaan jo yrittänyt murhan toteuttamistakin, mutta ei ollut päässyt huomaamatta Senaatintaloon ja oli siksi luopunut yrityksestä). Heitän arvauksena, että Schaumanin liikkeet rakennuksessa on päätelty toisaalta talon henkilökunnan tekemistä havainnoista ja toisaalta Hohenthalin muille aktivisteille kertomasta suunnitelmasta. Varmaan on mahdollista sekin, että joku Senaatintorilla on saattanut huomata salaperäisen hahmon ikkunassa. Vanhemmasta kirjallisuudesta tai aikalaislehdistä löytyisi varmaan vielä tarkempia kuvauksia silminnäkijöistä, onhan tapahtumista tehty aikanaan rikostutkintakin. --Risukarhi (keskustelu) 12. elokuuta 2021 kello 14.39 (EEST)

Translation:

Good question. The murder is described in detail in Seppo Zetterberg's biography about Schauman "Five shots in the senate" and in Tuomo Polvinen's biography about Bobrikov "The realm and the frontier". Both sources mention that when Schauman was hurrying from his point of inspection to the stairway he was met by a "familiar senate official" along the way, who asked him where he was going (Schauman replied: "I have no time for that now"). Neither source mentions that anyone was present when Schauman was peeking out of the window, but apparently many people saw him move around in the Senate House. Also Zetterberg's book mentions that Schauman described his plan in detail a couple of weeks earlier activist Lennart Hohental, who had already planned Bobrikov's murder (by the time of the discussion, Schauman had already attempted to carry out the murder, but had failed to slip into the Senate House unnoticed and had given the attempt up). I hazard a guess that Schauman's movements inside the building have be been extrapolated from observations made by the house staff on one hand and from the plan Hohenthal told other activists about on the other. It is also possible that someone on the Senate Square had noticed a mysterious figure in the window. There could be even more detailed descriptions about eyewitnesses in older literature or magazines, after all the incidents were reported as crimes at the time. --Risukarhi (talk) 12 August 2021 at 14:39 (EEST)

Can this information be used in the article? JIP | Talk 22:08, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JIP, you can’t cite the message board post on Finnish Wikipedia, but you can cite the facts that are in the two books with the books as sources. Polvinen’s is also available in English translation: [1]. The “Neither source mentions…apparently” and “I hazard / It is also possible / There could even” sentences in Risukarhi’s message can’t go in the article. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:11, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]