Humanities desk
< October 5	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 7 >

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.

October 6[edit]

The Little Mermaid cow's head vandalism[edit]

So in the book "The rough guide to Scandinavia", it's on Internet Archive although you have to borrow to read it, on page 98, it's claims that the little mermaid statue was vandalized in 1986, "a cow's head was forced over the replacement in 1986". Now the wikipedia article for the little mermaid statue have a section for vandalism but did not have the cow's head part, in fact, as far as I know, the only English source for the cow's head is The Rough Guide book. I did try to search it by Danish using google translate to no avail. I don't want the Rough Guide to be the only source for this cow's head vandalism, so if anyone know Danish can search for more source or any guidance to go from here, that would be great. But if no one can find any other sources, is it still ok to put the cow's head thing with the Rough Guide as a citation?Yusei158 (talk) 03:10, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can also see this on Google Books. The Danish Wikipedia does not mention any such incident, or any vandalism in 1986. --Lambiam 09:27, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Google search for "lille havfrue"+kohoved found nothing of relevance. --Lambiam 09:34, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

legal options regarding defamation/libel/insult/comparable offense in the following situation[edit]

following (abstracted) situation: there is a group (in the following I'm going to call them "Anti-A") whose main purpose to exist is giving it's members a space to express their opinions on historically and presently marginalized demographic A (with these opinions typically being considerally more negative than what is acceptable to say in mainstream society). Now, within Anti-A there are also members of a different historically and presently marginalized demographic B, which for mainstream society (including most members of demographic B) is associated with A, but whith the B-members of Anti-A vehemently denying any such association. Then Anti-A experiences a heated discussion between members who in addition to disliking A also dislike B and the members of Anti-A who are members of demographic B. In this context, a member of the anti-B side groups A and B together to disparage B. Would, in the scenario I just described, the Anti-A-members of demographic B have any legal options of complaining? --2A02:908:1985:200:E43F:181F:6E61:E634 (talk) 10:19, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They can "complain" all they want. As to whether they can sue, that will depend on where they are - and how much money they have to spend on attorneys. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:31, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Reference Desk does not give legal advice. However, as a general rule, where a defamatory publication affects a class of persons without any special personal application, no individual of that class can maintain an action for the publication. John M Baker (talk) 12:28, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That may depend on the jurisdiction; I doubt that this is universally true – bringing a class action is not possible everywhere. Legal options may be (1) a criminal complaint, and (2) a civil lawsuit seeking to obtain a legal remedy. The first is only plausible if the alleged plaintiff(s) have committed a crime. Uttering "I don't like you and your ilk" is unlikely to be considered a criminal act in many jurisdictions. The viability of the second potential recourse, whether for an individual or in a class action, also depends on the specifics of the case and the law and jurisprudence (case law) that is in force in the jurisdiction where the case is brought. Was the disparaging a wrongful act? Did it inflict actual harm on the complainants? Saying "Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries", which some may consider disparaging, will generally not be seen as harmful. All of this is completely independent of any demographic settings, which will only come into play with alleged hate crimes. (Also, why so complicated? If an option is plausibly successful for the Anti-A-members of demographic B, why would it not work for all members of demographic B?) --Lambiam 12:49, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do anti-mask, pro-vaccine people or pro-mask, anti-vaccine people exist? (COVID-19)[edit]

Most people who are anti-mask are also anti-vaccine, and vice versa. But are there people who are anti-mask but pro-vaccine or pro-mask but anti-vaccine? Are there any reliable sources that mention the existence of such people? Thanks! Félix An (talk) 15:54, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're kind of missing the point. Very few are literally anti-mask and anti-vaccine. What they oppose is someone telling them they have to. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:31, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed. --184.144.99.72 (talk) 20:40, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you really need a citation for that, then you haven't been paying attention. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:10, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then surely you could provide one easily? You know, here on the reference desk? Because your claim, so boldly stated, is very surprising compared to my personal experience, (and presumably 184.144.99.72's as well) Because I have been paying attention and I've been seeing lots and lots of people (wrongly, and without evidence) argue that masks and/or vaccines are dangerous. I don't know any way to describe those attitudes except as "literally anti-mask" and "literally anti-vaccine". You claim to have evidence that such views are held by "very few" individuals, so I would honestly be interested in seeing that evidence. Thank you. ApLundell (talk) 17:11, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one survey on who opposes mask mandates.[1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:26, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And here's how Lindsey Graham was greeted when he dared to bring up the subject of vaccines.[2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:30, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What percent of adults in America are now vaccinated? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:52, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Most of those who oppose masks and vaccines don't have sufficient functioning brain cells to have a coherent positions (probably on anything in life), so I'm not sure what your point it. The vast majority of anti-vaxxers claim to have some (non-existent) issue with the vaccine. If you really need a citation for that, then you haven't been paying attention. Fgf10 (talk) 08:00, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right. That's what one might expect from Trump die-hards. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:54, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The eerie similarities between the anti-mask and the anti-vax from August last year. Alansplodge (talk) 21:31, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a New Yorker article about health-care workers (who regularly wear masks) not wanting a vaccine. It does date from when the vaccine first came out, so the "rushed" argument is less salient now. [3] 70.67.193.176 (talk) 14:50, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I know someone who is pretty good about masks, but is unvaccinated and spews bullshit about vaccine side effects all the time. I don't know if I'd call her anti-vax per se, but she seems to think these particular vaccines don't work, or cause more trouble than they prevent, or are too risky, or something. 2602:24A:DE47:B8E0:1B43:29FD:A863:33CA (talk) 08:30, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Folks… this is not the place to vent personal opinions about the stupidity of other people. The question was whether there are people who are Anti-vax but Pro-mask (or Pro-vax but Anti-mask). The answer is a simple “yes”… while many anti-Vax people are also anti-mask, there are some who are OK with one, but not the other. There are also people who are pro-vax and pro-mask (for themselves), but anti-mandate (for others). Views on how to deal with Covid are wide ranging, and sometimes inconsistent. People are not necessarily in one “camp” or the other. Blueboar (talk) 13:07, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Of course there are. Have you not paid attention to the CDC and FDA? God forbid we try telling people to dump their cloth coverings and wear something meant to reduce aerosols. And the first chance they got, the CDC went from telling people to double-mask--that surgical masks are not sufficient--to telling them to drop their masks once vaccinated. They claimed that breakthrough infections were fine without ending in the hospital, but once the drug companies asked to sell more doses via boosters, they readily agreed, overruling their respective advisory panels of scientists. Read and weep: slides 12 and 20 in particular.[4] Imagine Reason (talk) 23:40, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What state did Khosrovidukht live in?[edit]

I'm about to work on adding what little is known to Khosrovidukht's life and work. Based on her dates (early 8th-century) and the fact that she is known to have been Armenian, what state would she have lived in? Arminiya? I looked around but the dates and different places are confusing me. Aza24 (talk) 22:05, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Links in this page may help you.Omidinist (talk) 03:57, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems plausible that she lived in Arminiya, which however was not a state but a province of the Umayyad Caliphate, at least until the Abbasid Revolution. The map in the Arminiya article cuts off the location of the Ani-Kamakh fortress, but it seems that without this cut-off it would have been in the area labelled A R M E N I A on the map. --Lambiam 09:26, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]