Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/M

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.

March 6

Editing for accurate age on my personal information

Can you edit and or explain how to edit information regarding accurate age on my personal information

Eric Radomski (64 years old-February 1961)

Currently Wiki states 75 years old 1950...Incorrect! RATMAN31 (talk) 00:59, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@RATMAN31: Our article on Eric Radomski does not mention age or date of birth. You were probably not looking at Wikipedia; please see Wikipedia:You can't fix Google through Wikipedia for a likely solution. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 01:14, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Our sister project Wikidata has the 1950 date, which it sources to howold.co. Howold.co is blacklisted on Wikipedia. If you can link us to a reliable source giving your birthdate, we can add that to the article, and also use it to update Wikidata.-Gadfium (talk) 01:43, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gadfium. I've removed the date from Wikidata (not sure how well that will stick so an accurate reference would still be useful). -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 01:50, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The background check website Nuwber.com (accessible from the US only) gives the birthdate February 3, 1961.^[1] While I do not know whether this counts as a RS, the site is cited as a source in several articles (Molly Corbett Broad, Anu Emmanuel, Ken Jenne, Don Megerle, Art Rooney Jr., James Taiclet, Donald Tang). ‑‑Lambiam 07:20, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nuwber.com looks pretty non-RS to me. John M Baker (talk) 02:28, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eric, are there any news articles, etc., that have said anything about your age? Alternatively, if you have a blog or something that can be definitively linked to you, we could use that. But we can’t use this; we don’t even know for sure that this is you. John M Baker (talk) 02:57, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a published interview with Eric from which we can infer his maximum age: he says The Godfather (1972) "had this great impact on me when I was 11 or 12." Card Zero (talk) 19:15, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eurostat

Does Eurostat have new data for UK? Are there any pan-European statistics that include data from both and EU countries, as well as countries like Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Armenia and Moldova? --40bus (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you look at their website? Nanonic (talk) 20:24, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not clear. Another UK-related questions:

1. Does UK have defined urban agglomerations that include cities with their environs, like metropolitan statistical areas in the US?
2. Why does UK not have strong administrative regions like French regions, departments, arrondisments and communes? UK has local authority districts (upper, lower and unitary), electoral wards and civil parishes, but they are not used like French ones. In UK it is difficult to estimate the city's limits as some cities are districts and others wards. --40bus (talk) 20:32, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  If it's not clear, why aren't you asking them to clarify it? Nanonic (talk) Nanonic (talk) 20:41, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

40bus, I don't know why you think that the UK should organise itself in the same way as France. Our history has been long and complicated, and our civil administration has evolved uniquely, as have those of other long-established countries.

Go to the link article Local government in the United Kingdom, and follow up the articles linked from it. Once you have read all of those, if you have any further questions come back and ask them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.64.108 (talk) 22:36, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1) No, since Brexit, the UK has not contributed to Eurostat (even though many non-EU countries do). 2) Yes, the British term is built-up area. 3) Unlike most countries there is essentially total English/British government continuity for centuries (it's never had a revolution nor a military invasion in centuries, and its most significant civil war was completely overturned and the king significantly centralised his power). There's never been a good opportunity for reorganizing the state (unlike say, the French Revolution or the defeat of Nazi Germany), nor a time when central government was weak and regional leaders could grab power. For the same reason, the legal distinction between England and the UK is often confusing (see English votes for English laws). City borders tend be inconsistent because the Industrial Revolution significantly changed the distribution of wealth and population in the UK - cities grew over ancient borough boundaries - and for a long time nothing was done about this. The 1966 Redcliffe-Maud Report would have fixed this, but a change of government to the Conservatives led to those plans being shelved and a much more piecemeal reorganisation happening instead. Smurrayinchester 10:56, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 8

Quilts stonework Leith, Edinburgh

What is the round stonework along the water of Leith and the Quilt flats in Leith Edinburgh Scotland? It is called Portal on google maps being used for pokeman. Sherilu (talk) 08:08, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give geocoordinates? There is a store in Leith named Portal Leith; any connection? ‑‑Lambiam 08:55, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, it has no connection to the store. Is there a way I can share a link for google maps or a picture? Sherilu (talk) 09:07, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1EhnJ5AN6U/? Sherilu (talk) 09:13, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These? Alansplodge (talk) 12:49, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for trying. Unfortunately not. It’s this https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1EhnJ5AN6U/ Sherilu (talk) 12:52, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That link redirects me to https://www.facebook.com/groups/ILoveLeith, where I see no round stonework.

If you can find it on Google Street View, you can simply copy the url, like this one. ‑‑Lambiam 16:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it is this, seen from another angle here. My first guess is that this is an art piece, like land art but on a small scale and with a sculptural element. If so, it was probably commissioned by the owner of the ground it is located on. ‑‑Lambiam 17:19, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also found it on Google Satellite View. ‑‑Lambiam 17:28, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Helicopter blades rotation

Sometimes in a video of helicopter blades rotating at full or near-full speed (both on main rotor and tail) I get an impression that they abruptly change direction of rotation, from a counter-clockwise to clockwise or vice versa. Perhaps others also had this. Is this an optical illusion? 212.180.235.46 (talk) 16:45, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Stroboscopic effect and, specifically, Wagon-wheel effect. ‑‑Lambiam 16:51, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 20:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 10

Ranch-style bungalows

When I was researching different styles in residential architecture a few months ago, I remember coming across a phrase which had shocked me quite a bit (although I can no longer find it -- it might have been in the article Bungalow, Ranch-style house or Open plan, or maybe somewhere else), something to the effect that in some, but not all, ranch-style bungalows, "bedrooms were part of the open floor plan". Which begs at least 4 questions: (1) Does this mean what I think it means (i.e. that the bedrooms were actually open to the rest of the house)??? (2) If the answer to (1) is yes, then was it actually true??? (3) If the answer to (2) is also yes, then what exactly did it look like in terms of the floor plan??? And (4) if the answers to (1) and (2) are yes, then how could any family (with or without children) function normally in such a residence??? 2601:646:8082:BA0:810B:168D:9380:CDDC (talk) 22:09, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The answer might come from thinking about the meaning of the word "normally" there. HiLo48 (talk) 22:39, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, could someone please clarify whether or not it was actually the case that any houses were built in the way I described??? And as for whether a family (or indeed any group of people) can function normally for an indefinite period in the complete absence of individual privacy, note that the Mir space station was specially designed to include private cabins (which the earlier Salyut space stations didn't have) -- do you not think there was a specific reason for this??? (And this was from Soviets, no less, who generally weren't big on private or individual anything!) 73.162.165.162 (talk) 03:53, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't speak to contemporary architecture, but historically, many cultures around the world lived in Longhouses or similar shared accommodation that can have afforded little personal privacy, even when not everyone in them were part of the same family.

Single-room dwellings were (I believe) the norm for the majority of the population in Europe prior to the mediaeval period. For most of our species' 300,000-year existence, sexual activity has likely not been regarded as requiring privacy from other adults, or concealment from children. Our currently fashionable mores are not unchanging universal laws. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.64.108 (talk) 05:25, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nor are there universal standards all around the world. HiLo48 (talk) 05:41, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea how they were able to live like that in the old days, because it is a scientific fact that a persistent lack of privacy in the home does have severe negative impacts on mental health -- to quote here (note: AI-generated):

"Yes, a lack of privacy in the home can significantly negatively impact mental health, leading to feelings of stress, anxiety, vulnerability, and a sense of being overwhelmed.

Here's a more detailed explanation:

Stress and Anxiety:

When you lack personal space and the ability to retreat for privacy, it can contribute to increased stress and anxiety levels.

Overwhelm and Feeling Exposed:

The constant presence of others or the feeling of being watched can make individuals feel exposed and vulnerable, making it difficult to relax and feel safe in their own homes.

Sense of Control and Autonomy:

A lack of privacy can erode a sense of control and autonomy within one's own home, further contributing to feelings of anxiety and stress.

Lack of Personal Space:

Having no space to yourself within the home means you can't escape the bustle of household activities or responsibilities, which can be difficult when dealing with feelings of stress.

Impacts on Identity and Well-being:

Privacy is a fundamental psychological need and lack of it can affect a person's ability to develop their own unique identity and feel secure in their environment.

Perception of Social Isolation:

A lack of privacy can also contribute to feelings of social isolation as well as make it difficult for people to express themselves authentically and freely.

Impact on Relationships:

A lack of privacy in the home can affect family relationships and create conflict and tension."

2601:646:8082:BA0:24C8:7879:FEC5:96E (talk) 03:03, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Define "privacy" and "mental health" in such a way as to be acceptable to all cultures at all times and places around the world throughout human history. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:57, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a valid question -- the very concept of mental health was not defined, and the impact of a person's environment on it not recognized, until the late 19th century, so by definition you are demanding that I meet an impossible criteria! Nor is it valid to demand a definition which is "acceptable to all cultures" -- historically there have been many cultures, and there still are some, which reject the scientific method or mix it with a great deal of magical thinking (which amounts to the same thing), so formulating a definition which is "acceptable to all cultures" would by that very fact result in a definition which is scientifically invalid! In other words, cultural relativism is incompatible with science, and you are demanding that I reject the latter and embrace the former! 2601:646:8082:BA0:75FA:A05C:64CE:8D03 (talk) 23:12, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This idea of privacy as a health concern is fascinating. I was just reading about the latest incident at SANAE IV, which is all over the news. Looking into related phenomena, such as cabin fever, prairie madness, Island fever, and winter-over syndrome, notions of privacy do come up here and there as major factors, but have largely gone unstudied. I was under the impression that by 2025 we would understand all of these things. Looking at these articles, it appears we understand nothing. This idea of isolation was a popular one during the pandemic. My personal take is that extroverts are more susceptible to these problems, while introverts have a kind of built-in protection against it. Speaking only for myself, I love the isolation of living on a relatively small island and I enjoyed the isolation of the COVID-19 pandemic. I've read the testimony of extroverts who can't spend more than a week in Hawaii without going "stir crazy" and are not comfortable being alone for any extended period of time. They also said that the pandemic was their worst nightmare and they feel like they are permanently emotionally scarred. How does all of this come back to the perceived notion of privacy in families living in small enclosed spaces? I have no idea, but I want to know the answer. Viriditas (talk) 22:59, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The statement is rather implausible; ranch-style bungalows with such a floor plan will not do well on the market. Anyone can edit Wikipedia and add false or misleading statements, which almost always are soon afterwards removed. If the statement you saw was as you think, it may have been due to such a drive-by edit – I cannot find anything remotely similar in any article. ‑‑Lambiam 09:00, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will not do well on the market where? Which country? HiLo48 (talk) 09:10, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Any country where ranch-style bungalows are a common type of housing. ‑‑Lambiam 22:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SO you're simply speculating. HiLo48 (talk) 22:57, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you really think these are popular outside of North America? ‑‑Lambiam 08:43, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[un-indent] Good point about possible market impact having a deterrent effect against such experimentation (although there are actually at least a few houses where the sleeping area is open to the rest of the house -- Philip Johnson's Glass House being perhaps the most egregious example -- but the ones I've heard of are technically not ranch-style, and it does appear that these are pretty rare exceptions from the general rule!) 2601:646:8082:BA0:7824:124F:3E3C:908D (talk) 00:07, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of AI generated nonsense above about modern standards of privacy being essential to mental health. I will speak from an American perspective but I am sure that this is historically false in every culture. Abraham Lincoln spent his early childhood living in Kentucky in poverty in a 16 foot by 18 foot one room log cabin with his parents and two siblings, one who died very young. His family moved to Indiana when he was seven, living in a similarly primitive house. After his mother died, his father married a woman who already had three children. Houses like this were commonplace in America for centuries. Native Americans lived in one room tipis, hogans, wigwams and longhouses for millenia. Several interrelated multigenerational families lived in a single large room in longhouses, and in winter, they spent a large percentage of their time in their houses doing craft work. Immigrants in big cities lived in large numbers in one or two room tenement apartments. So, the widespread expectation of a high degree of personal privacy is a very modern invention that derives from the creation of the 20th century middle class. Cullen328 (talk) 04:25, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from anything else, and certainly if we're talking about people living before the early modern era, they'd have had more important things on their mind than privacy. I'd imagine the rampant infectious diseases, low life expectancy, constant risk of crop failure and famine, widespread warfare (at least in many times/places), etc, would have been more of a worry than not having one's own bedroom. Proteus (Talk) 11:00, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't trust AI-generated answers (and there are cases where they should not be trusted), then here's a non-AI-generated source, directly from a construction company no less, which backs up what I've said: https://www.logspan.com/blog/the-pain-of-not-having-your-own-space-within-the-home-and-solutions?srsltid=AfmBOoogTrhmAY6BNdIZAg1iftMdIKfoMwCh47e-5r7WtTs9avknOvPh And here's another one, from a traditional media outlet generally considered reliable: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/12/the-health-risks-of-small-apartments/282150/ And here's a first-hand account from someone who has actually experienced this: https://www.voicesofyouth.org/blog/living-lack-privacy And another two from psychologists (from India, too, so you cannot claim this is a Western-only phenomenon): https://manochikitsa.com/how-to-deal-with-lack-of-privacy-at-home/ https://mpowerminds.com/blog/Reasons-why-personal-space-is-important-for-mental-health-Dos-and-Donts-of-personal-space And last but not least, a study by the UK Health Foundation which shows a significant correlation between lack of privacy at home and stress levels: https://www.health.org.uk/evidence-hub/housing/housing-stability-and-security/relationship-between-living-in-overcrowded Bottom line is: privacy in the home is very important for mental health, and it is you who are talking nonsense by dismissing this "because history"! (And in any case, the argument "because history" does not fly -- in the Middle Ages it was considered normal to live in an unsanitary environment, and during the Industrial Revolution it was considered normal to live in an environment with extremely high levels of pollution, but that did not make this kind of life any less harmful to those who had to live it!) 2601:646:8082:BA0:24C8:7879:FEC5:96E (talk) 19:11, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with your analogy to poor sanitation and excessive exposure to pollution is that we have excellent epidemiological evidence that these environmental factors caused elevated levels of physical disease and early death. There is no evidence that simply being raised in a one room dwelling caused increased mental illness. Cullen328 (talk) 08:28, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is evidence that living in an overcrowded home environment causes stress -- did you fail to notice, or did you choose to ignore, the last link I've provided above??? 2601:646:8082:BA0:24C8:7879:FEC5:96E (talk) 16:11, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What "overcrowded" means differs across time and space. As does the amount of separation from others expected. Unless you want to say that virtually all hulans throughout much of history were mentally ill, your argument falls apart. Yes, being in a "too crowded" environment with "not enough privacy" is detrimental, but these levels are set by the general circumstances of the society you are in. They are not exact measurements like "more than 3 people in a 10 square meter area " is detrimental. The study you linked to is about people who grew up in low population density households with a high level of privacy who are now living in crowded houses with little privacy. Obviously such a change is detrimental. But it says nothing about people raised in higher density households. I would assume that people raised in such shared living spaces would find your idea of enough room and privacy to be distressingly lonely and isolating. Which would be just as detrimental to them.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:58, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was asking specifically about living in a residence without separation between the bedrooms and common areas, not about the amount of floor area per person! Also, my other question remains unanswered -- were there actually ranch-style houses (or similar) built in such a way??? 2601:646:8082:BA0:24C8:7879:FEC5:96E (talk) 23:40, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m pretty familiar with the open floor plan style bungalows and ranch houses. In general, the open floor plan you refer to almost always includes no separation between the living room, dining room, and kitchen. There’s often an entry way area that can go by different names, but more often than not it is separated by doors for climate control. Now, beyond that, the open plan doesn’t generally extend to bedrooms, so I think that’s where your confusion lies. However, when the doors and walls are removed in such floor plans in large industrial spaces, they are known as lofts. It’s true that some people have copied this open floor plan from lofts into modern, minimal bungalows and ranch house spaces, but those will generally be built for a single person or a couple, not for families. Viriditas (talk) 01:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! So, did I understand correctly that you said that there are in fact some bungalows/ranch-style houses without any separate bedrooms (i.e. the "bedroom" is open to the common area without any walls in between, like in an open-section Pullman car from the Russian Railways), but this is not common practice (just as I thought at first)? Also, I still have no idea how even an intentionally child-free couple can function normally in such a residence (although admittedly it could be OK for a single person living all alone)! 2601:646:8082:BA0:75FA:A05C:64CE:8D03 (talk) 22:59, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One aspect that may not have occurred to you is that although not closed off by doors, the sleeping area(s) may be reached by a multi-cornered corridor that blocks direct views (and to some extent sounds) from the other living areas.

As for a child-free couple functioning normally – I myself (a normal UK citizen) have, on several occasions (some lasting years), lived in accommodation with sleeping quarters shared with anything from two to two dozen other completely unrelated people. Almost anyone who has served in the Armed Forces (which I have not) will also have done so. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.64.108 (talk) 23:13, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we call those barracks. Also, some school dormitories are setup that way, but the modern ones generally have less than four people to a room, more often than not two in the US. What is super interesting is how large families do it in small houses. You'll see siblings use dividers of some kind to maintain their privacy, usually consisting of panels. For those that know how to do it, a bit of drywall can turn a large room into two, and this is far more common than you might think. Viriditas (talk) 23:24, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

94 IP: Your personal experience in the army is not relevant to couples, and is therefore a false analogy in this case -- the military is a sex-segregated environment, so your experience was that of a single person, not that of a couple (and I've already said that living like that could be OK for a single person, in fact my original question made reference to families, not singles living alone)! And Viriditas: Yes, this is indeed fascinating in architectural terms, so thanks for sharing! And BTW, it also proves my point -- large families will seek to subdivide shared living spaces in order to increase privacy, thereby turning an open plan into something more akin to a traditional one! And yes, subdividing a large room into two (or more, if necessary and possible without violating building codes) by installing an interior wall is precisely the solution for lack of privacy that was the first to come to my mind (in fact, I had already done it on a few floor plan drawings as an architectural exercise) -- however, that will effectively change the floor plan, so it won't be the same anymore (as indeed is the purpose of this)! 2601:646:8082:BA0:3433:BF5A:2806:D406 (talk) 03:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I specifically said my experience was not in the military; and I have experienced sleeping in mixed-sex groups (of unrelated adults) in one large space, though not on a long-term basis.

You are also narrowing down on a very extreme definition of 'open plan'. This does not necessarily mean a totally open space with no internal dividing wall or movable screens whatever. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.64.108 (talk) 07:27, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am using a very extreme definition of "open plan", but that is because my original question was about just such extreme examples thereof (whether they actually exist in residential architecture apart from a few one-off examples like the aforementioned Glass House, and if so, how can a couple or a family possibly function normally in such a space -- obviously, if there is physical separation between the bedroom(s) and the common area, then the second part is no longer an issue) -- as for the other part, residential architecture is precisely about creating spaces to be lived in on a long-term basis, so your personal experience of living in a shared space with others (related or not, mixed-sex or sex-segregated) still does not apply here on this basis. 2601:646:8082:BA0:CC4F:97C3:D44F:6C39 (talk) 21:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. The open-section Pullman car-like layout is referred to as a railroad apartment in the US. There are many different kinds. In San Francisco, some of the smaller and older units have a single door separating each room, so it's the same layout as the Pullman but with a door in between each "car". The nicer ones have a hallway that are separate from the rooms with no doors needed. The most interesting ones I've seen in this regard in the city are the vertical ones, but those are unusual. I went to a party once on Church and Market that had one of these. You walk in from the ground level and take a flight of stairs to the second floor room, then another flight of stairs to the third floor room, and another flight of stairs to the fourth floor room! Great for parties, but I can't imagine living there. Viriditas (talk) 23:13, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My comparison to an open-section Pullman car was in regard to the lack of separation between the bedroom(s) and the common area, not in regard to the detailed layout. 2601:646:8082:BA0:3433:BF5A:2806:D406 (talk) 03:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 14

Gestalt psychology

Have all the Gestalt psychologists died out? Behrens 1998 indicates that Rudolf Arnheim was the last one left, but he died in 2007. I've read elsewhere that in academia many disciplines and their ideas tend to die out if there are no students left to carry their torches. In this case, Behrens argues "gestalt theory's influence in the field of psychology is unobtrusive in the sense that its findings have all been absorbed by more recent viewpoints and because most of the prominent gestalt psychologists have either retired or died." Just checking to see if Arnheim was indeed the last one or if the idea continues today. Note, this is not related to Gestalt therapy, as that is entirely different. Viriditas (talk) 00:37, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just like Gestalt psychologists could not precisely define central concepts of psychology, we cannot precisely define the concept of "Gestalt psychologist". The school arose as a reaction to a rather reductionist school, but as its ideas became mainstream, it gradually lost its identity – there was no need to carry torches. Today's psychologists studying human cognition will generally not self-identify as such. You can ask, "Have the atomist physicists died out? Was Alexander W. Williamson the last atomist?" A better answer is that today all physicists are atomists (nutcases apart), but labeling them as such is not helpful in any way. Likewise, labelling Arnheim's later work as being Gestalt psychology is perhaps not wrong, but also not particularly helpful. ‑‑Lambiam 10:02, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just discovered Grolier's coverage of this topic in the IA. In addition to what you write above, it says that concepts of Gestalt psychology were absorbed into or overlapped with social psychology, cross-cultural psychology, and other fields. I came to this topic because of notan. In the literature, it is said that nobody knows how the ideas of Gestalt and Japanese art arose. As it turns out these Gestalt ideas influenced a number of artists and art schools, strangely those in the United States in the 1890s, which was approximately several decades before Gestalt psychology was formed in 1912. Behrens 1998 discusses this, attributing it to the popularity of Japonisme and the "persuasive resemblance between gestalt principles and...Japanese-inspired aesthetics". It wasn't until the 1930s that Paul Klee, Wassily Kandinsky, and Josef Albers heard the lectures of the Gestalt psychologist Karlfried Graf Dürckheim at the Bauhaus. In any case, the rise of Gestalt-like aesthetics in American art schools under Ernest Fenollosa and Arthur Wesley Dow decades before it arose in Germany begins to look like a case of multiple discovery on the one hand, and the pervasive influence of Japonisme on the other. Viriditas (talk) 22:04, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is a journal Gestalt Theory , now in its 47th year and apparently still kicking. ‑‑Lambiam 07:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 15

Umbrellas redux

I apologize in advance for resurrecting this discussion, but I came across something unusual today. One of the main takeaways from the previous thread was that umbrellas were considered a feminine accessory at some point. But in an article about Vassar College from January 1937, when it was still a women's college, it is said that "umbrellas are taboo".[2] I'm detecting a bit of tongue in cheek humor as the assertion is accompanied by a photo of a student stuck in the rain. Not sure if Life is making a joke here or not. Viriditas (talk) 21:50, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It might have been a custom specific to the College's 'culture' at that time (though possibly also replicated elsewhere). When I attended a boarding school, a similar, entirely unwritten, 'rule' supposedly forbade boys below the 6th form (i.e. ages 16–18) from using umbrellas in the quad, though I myself flouted it on several occasions. Such arbitrary customs can easily arise in schools and colleges, and indeed in societies as a whole. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.64.108 (talk) 03:54, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I think you are right, it’s just that the photos Life used made it seem like a joke. Viriditas (talk) 07:28, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it and similar things likely seem funny to an outside observer who isn't getting wet. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.64.108 (talk) 11:06, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A well dressed victorian or edwardian lady would carry as her fashion accessory a parasol which is a fragile frilly thing not to be confused with a rugged rain dispelling umbrella that, when needed, a gentleman escort should carry for her. Philvoids (talk) 17:19, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Viriditas (talk) 22:50, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Curiously, the meaning of Latin umb(r)ella is solely that of a shade-providing parasol, and until relatively recently English umbrella could equally refer to a folding contraption for sheltering someone from sunshine as from rain.^[3] The 1911 Century Dictionary writes, in the entry umbrella: A small and light form of umbrella, carried by women as a protection from the rays of the sun, often in gay colors, or ornamented with ribbons, lace, etc., is habitually called a parasol. [...] As a defense from rain or snow it was not used in western Europe till early in the eighteenth century.^[4] ‑‑Lambiam 23:50, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The "para-" prefix meaning "protection from", as with the sun when using a parasol. Same prefix for "parachute", meaning "protection from a fall". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:08, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paralegals: people who protect us from dreaded lawyers. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:52, 20 March 2025 (UTC) [reply]

You're being funny, but you're not far off:[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:06, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, a less well-dressed Victorian lady might carry around her own, sturdy, non-parasol umbrella, like Mrs. Bagnet in Bleak House -- which was written in the 1850s and is meant to be set in the 1820s or 1830s. -- Avocado (talk) 00:34, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention Sarah Gamp, though some might not call her a lady. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.64.108 (talk) 03:19, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 18

plant protein

Healthy diet#Others

In 2022, the American Society for Preventive Cardiology defined a healthful dietary pattern as a diet consisting predominantly of fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, seeds, plant protein and fatty fish with reduced consumption of saturated fat, salt and ultra-processed food.

What do they mean by "plant protein"? 193.116.250.82 (talk) 12:17, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you follow the link in the article, you will find this [6]. --Viennese Waltz 12:58, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 19

Down the road

Here's an unlikely scenario: Let's say a woman named Alice is 9 months pregnant and is in a car on the right side of Canusa Street with her husband, Bob. Suddenly, Alice is about to have birth, so Bob quickly rushes to the nearest hospital. Unfortunately, Bob panics and swerves the car left, and exactly halfway between the road, their baby is born. All of the passengers survive.

With that said, is the baby American, Canadian, neither, or both? TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 05:46, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The yellow line down the middle seems to be about 3 or 4 inches wide. A car is a lot wider than that, so any car that is "on" the centre line must have some part of it on one side, and some part on the other. But that's just the car. What is the location of the humans inside? It's possible that all of them could be on one side of the line, if, say, Alice was sitting in the back seat behind Bob. Without further information it would be impossible to tell. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:36, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Babies tend not to be born in an instant, and even if they were there would be more pressing concerns than its nationality. See Birth aboard aircraft and ships for similar scenarios. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:44, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's uncertainty about the exact position and the officials only have the parents' word stating it was either this side or that. The most likely outcome is that the parents can choose, and would normally choose the side giving least bureaucracy; pragmatic officials wouldn't mind. If the parents are Usan or Canadian, they will normally pick their own side. If there are formal border checks (apparently the case today), those may be relevant too.

Such streets with a border running down the middle or along the edge of the street, with houses on both sides, are pretty common in Europe; I count around 30 towns with such streets in Belgium alone. European countries however tend to run on jus sanguinis principles and have mostly open borders, avoiding the issue. This makes Canusa Street's claim on the friendliest border in the world questionable. It must be the typical American hyperbole. PiusImpavidus (talk) 12:44, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Line house [7]. 2A00:23C7:E197:1C01:D411:6500:B0F3:68E2 (talk) 14:34, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 23

Transcontinental countries

Are Armenia and Cyprus transcontinental countries? They can be considered both European and Asian countries, but if they are European, all of these countries is part of Europe. If they are Asian, all is part of Asia. Are such countries considered transcotinental?

--40bus (talk) 23:30, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Armenia article says it's in west Asia. The Cyprus article says it's geographically in west Asia but culturally and politically European. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:25, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Although the historical Armenia Major was definitely an Asian country, some definitions locate current Armenia in Europe. For more, see Boundaries between the continents § Asia and Europe. ‑‑Lambiam 09:02, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In antiquity, the world was thought to have a central sea (the Mediterranean), with some islands in it. This was surrounded by three continents (Europa, Asia, Africa), separated by narrow stretches of water, and that was surrounded by the ocean. So, Armenia was in Asia and Cyprus wasn't part of any continent. It turned out that the division between Africa and Asia along the Nile didn't work so well, so it's now commonly drawn along the Suez Canal, which is artificial. It also turned out that there's no connection from the Northeast of the Black Sea to the ocean, so people tried to draw an arbitrary boundary from the Black Sea to the Arctic sea, typically via the Caspian Sea and the Ural Mountains. It's poorly defined though, with 4 major variations between the Black Sea and Caspian Sea and many minor variations on those.

Türkiye is according to every definition partially in Europe and partially in Asia, so it's transcontinental. Cyprus is depending on the definition in Europe or in Asia or in neither, but not in both. Armenia is in Europe or in Asia, but according to most sensible definitions not in both. I don't think one could consider them transcontinental. Although, as a minor variation on the boundary along the Aras river, one could claim only some of the westernmost parts of Armenia are in Asia. Georgia and Azerbaijan could be transcontinental, depending on your definition. PiusImpavidus (talk) 12:20, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If one takes the Suez Canal as the dividing line, Egypt is transcontinental. By most definintions, Russia is also partly in Europe and partly in Asia. And if one includes the Overseas departments and regions of France, which politically "have exactly the same status as European France's departments and regions", then France is transcontinental, too. Deor (talk) 14:53, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And I see we have List of transcontinental countries. Deor (talk) 14:57, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Previously discussed at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 April 1#Armenia, Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 August 22#Truths which are allegedly created by opinions about what the truth is, Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2010 December 9#Easternmost country in Europe?, Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2012 September 26#Muslim dominated neighbourhoods in Europe, Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2013 April 22#Euro. 2A00:23D0:EC9:4101:8D7A:1710:8AA6:4B30 (talk) 17:02, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 24

Extra electricity on the grid

You run a small power company with a power plant that generates 100 MW. If you could somehow know that your customers demanded 100 MW at certain times of day and 50 MW at other times, you'd generate those amounts at those times. However, you can't know this, so you always have to generate at least a little more to avoid brownouts. (1) Aside from estimates derived from experience, and real-time data generated by monitoring demand, how can you know how much power to generate at any given time? (2) If you generate 60 MW when your customers are using just 50 MW, what happens to the excess? Do the lines resist the excess power, causing it to be radiated as heat? Is the power plant physically unable to generate more than the demand, so the plant spends more input energy (e.g. you burn more coal than needed) than needed to match demand? Is the excess used to charge giant batteries, which are then used when the power plant isn't running?

I've read Load management, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. As far as I can understand, in load management, the power company reduces demand by somehow disabling some customers' electrical devices, but this seems to have effects comparable to brownouts, so probably I'm fundamentally misunderstanding the article. Nyttend (talk) 10:09, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Electrical transmission is effectively instantaneous (the electrical energy powering your light now was (e.g.) thermal energy in a steam turbine a few milliseconds ago), so a utility doesn't generate excess capacity in anticipation of a rise (but it might ready additional capacity in anticipation). Supply must meet demand in real time. The rotational inertia of the rotors in thermal generators provides inertial response (they're effectively flywheels), smoothing out brief blips in the mismatch between supply and demand. Longer-term changes (more than a few seconds) must be managed actively by grid balancing, where the grid manager actively brings online additional supply (commanding the online generators to supply more, or less) and later ordering additional generation online (batteries, stored-hydro, peaker plants) or load-shedding. An important element of this is interconnection, where local excesses of generation or demand can be ameliorated by sharing with a larger grid. So even if that local mom-and-pop power company has 100 MW of generation and rarely anticipates its local customer base wanting more than that, it will still seek an interconnect with its neighbours, so it can exploit them as a huge sink of both supply and demand. Almost everyone gets their power from a supplier that is connected to their regional/national/transnational wide area synchronous grid, providing a high-degree of interconnect. It's much more difficult to manage the stability of an isolated microgrid (an "island grid"). -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 12:01, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that a regional interconnect has lots of other benefits too - it allows an open market, it allows large and expensive baseload suppliers (like nuclear stations) and cheap but intermittent renewables to interoperate (and sell into one another's market), and it allows reliable supply during long-term outages (so MomNPopCo can take their 100 MW plant offline altogether, so they can service it, as long as there is sufficient interconnect capacity to cover the shortfall - they will plan this downtime with the grid manager, so the grid and the remaining generation capacity isn't overtaxed). But even if none of these were an issue, the simple fact of the grid being there makes it very valuable for local supply stability. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 12:12, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When a power station produces 100 MW for its consumer and the consumer only uses 50 MW, the excess power simply flows to a different consumer on the same grid. A different producer may decrease production or a different consumer may increase consumption. It works out technically, but economically it's not so nice, as the wrong bills may be send.

So, economically, the industrial producers, industrial consumers and retailers create contracts. Basically futures contracts, specifying the power to be delivered/consumed at a particular section of the grid during a particular 15 minute interval at a particular price. Such contracts can be created a year in advance or just half an hour. Small consumers and producers (households with solar panels) are usually not involved in such contracts; they only deal with the retailer. Producers then produce as agreed, consumers consume as agreed, retailers hope their estimates were good and the grid stays more or less in balance.

Practically, the predictions aren't perfect. Production from wind and solar varies randomly with the weather (weather forecasts are getting better; the 30 minute forecasts are particularly relevant here), when overtime is required in an important football match, the post-match power peak is delayed and occasionally a technical malfunction causes an entire gigawatt of production to drop offline in a second.

Big producers constantly adjust their power slightly above of below the contracted levels to keep the grid steady. If there's too little production, the voltage drops slightly, current from the spinning generators increases, the electromagnetic torque increases and the generator, which has a lot of rotating inertia, slows down and its phase begins to lag behind the ideal. The power station (thermal or hydro) responds by increasing the mechanical torque driving the generator to keep the frequency of the power grid within narrow limits, so that all generators on the grid remain in phase. In central Europe, the frequency is between 49.8 and 50.2 Hz, but most of the time they manage to keep it between 49.95 and 50.05 Hz. There're always big generators spinning at idle, which can be moved to full power very rapidly. Solar panels have no such inertia and wind turbines have inertia, but can't use it, so they're bad for grid stability – in addition to their random fluctuations.

When adjustments can't be made fast enough, it may be necessary to cut consumption. Power companies have agreements with some big consumers, like aluminium smelters, that they can be forced to idle power at moments notice. In an emergency, an entire subgrid with a large shortage can be kicked offline, causing a blackout.

Afterwards, those who deviated from the agreed production/consumption pay those who fixed it. PiusImpavidus (talk) 15:01, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quiet! Hospital

In old cartoons and other comedies, you sometimes see signs such as "Quiet! Hospital Zone" or some such. I assume it's more commonly seen as comedies as it's usually played as the restriction the comedy must work against. A Google image search suggests that these are not merely inventions for entertainment: Here is an example from Shutterstock. I've never seen one in real life and the need for one baffles me. When I search for quiet hospital I get results that are the exact opposite: hospitals are too noisy and it's detrimental for all concerned.
So where did this trope come from and what was it specifically meant to do? I mean, I get that's it's supposed to keep things quieter, but what noise qualifies as too much and what would actually be impacted? How common was this? Matt Deres (talk) 18:56, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noise makes it harder for nurses to hear monitors and for patients to sleep. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 19:30, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The pictured sign is a formal road traffic sign that can be used in prosecution of objectionable use of car horns or sirens though presumably ambulances are excepted. Philvoids (talk) 20:01, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]