Humanities desk
< April 7	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 9 >

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.

April 8[edit]

Agromassidayu.com[edit]

I came across this webpage recently and have been unable to get much information about it. It's quite interesting, is in English with a Russian flavor.

Can anyone please show who and where this website is run by? eng.agromassidayu.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:9060:5A80:7032:8906:342E:85E7 (talk) 05:08, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can't tell who it's run by either (no 'About' page and WHOIS is useless), but I can probably tell you what it is: a content farm. I Googled a few snippets of articles (in English and Russian) and the only results are their own website, so perhaps they're actually writing them (or at least paraphrasing a bit) instead of just copying from somewhere.

As for where it is, it's behind Cloudflare, so it's not clear where the servers are located. (and even IPs wouldn't confirm where the owners are)

Sunmist (talk) 05:23, 8 April 2022 (UTC); edited 05:28, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The website exists in 42 languages; the first label of the three-label web address identifies the language in a three-letter code. If you leave out this label, resulting in agromassidayu.com, you land on a page in Bulgarian. --Lambiam 08:22, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat tellingly, Russian is not one of these 42 languages. I discern a pro-Russian slant in the content. Item: "Is there kleptocracy in Russia? In terms of logic and common sense, all governments in the world can be blamed for kleptocracy."^[1] It is reminiscent of the reaction All Lives Matter to the slogan Black Lives Matter. --Lambiam 08:37, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As to the debate stopper that all governments are kleptocracies, compare also the new commandment to replace all commandments, "All animals are equal, ..." . --Lambiam 12:11, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the argument is the fallacy of binary thinking; that degree doesn't matter, all that matters is existence or non-existence. That all governments, to a degree, contain at least one person in them which is corrupt does not mean that all governments are equally corrupt, and that governments with lower levels of corruption have no means to be critical of governments with much higher and more harmful levels of corruption. --Jayron 32 12:27, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Latinx[edit]

Per top of page, we don’t answer request for opinions, and we’ve got a reference now for the existing term and how it is used. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:23, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with Latino/Latina/Latinx is that it refers to the people who speak a derivative of Latin in the Americas. Wouldn't that include the Quebecois? I would like to propose a new term to refer to the inhabitants of Central and South America: American Iberians. What do you all think about this term?

CorporateCommie (talk) 09:33, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 January 8 § In theory, Quebec is part of Latin America. --Lambiam 11:43, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One might think that American Iberians speak a descendant of Iberian in the Americas. Or, based on the meaning of the noun Iberian, that this refers to Americans who are natives of the Iberian Peninsula, like Tiffany Red. Not all countries of Central and South America have a national language that descends from Latin. Finally, Portuguese and Spanish are not the only languages from Iberia that have crossed the ocean to South America; don't forget the large contingent of Basque Argentines. --Lambiam 12:00, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's a problem if you choose to make it a problem. Maybe some others do too, but millions don't. See etymological fallacy. ColinFine (talk) 12:17, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I think the OP is committing the greatest cardinal sin of linguistics, which is the etymological fallacy, which is to say that a word means only what it's historical roots say it should mean. That's not true in any way. Etymology is not usage, and that a word has a root history doesn't mean it can only mean what that history indicates that it should. Yes, languages like French do derive from Latin. That is simultaneously true and irrelevant to understanding what the terms "latino/a/x" actually mean. The only way we can learn what the terms mean is to look at their usage; what group of people are meant by a speaker when they use the term "Latinx" and its related terms. The truth is, Quebecois are not included in that usage. No one uses the term to include the Quebecois. Because they are not included in the minds of speakers when they use the term. It doesn't matter that French is a Latin-derived language. Definition is controlled by usage and by the intent of the speakers using the word, not by history. --Jayron 32 12:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there something wrong with Hispanic? I suppose it doesn't include Brazilians, but that seems like a detail. Also, look at the usage notes at wikt:Latinx#Usage notes, which I would personally summarise as "don't". Actually, which are the other non-Spanish-speaking South American countries? There's French Guiana (French, oddly enough), Suriname (Dutch), and Guyana (English). Card Zero (talk) 13:08, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That other words exist, doesn't mean that this word is wrong. As noted, latinx is not a perfect synonym of Hispanic, and furthermore, the term is widely used. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. --Jayron 32 13:40, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's also Latin (as a noun for a speaker of a Latin language). Seems little used for some reason. Probably Latino/Latina gained more popular use due to being Spanishy words. Card Zero (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification. The reason I asked this question was to find a middle ground between the proponents of Latinx(as it is gender neutral) and the people who find it offensive : https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/politico-poll-40-percent-of-hispanics-find-latinx-offensive/

Also, the term isn't well-known : https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2020-08-11/latinx-pew-poll-latino-hispanic-identity

It guess Latin American is gender neutral and can satisfy both the parties.

CorporateCommie (talk) 15:06, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just realized that American-Iberian would exclude Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana. But Dutch and English is Germanic not Latin.

CorporateCommie (talk) 15:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not entirely sure why the discussion was closed... the question isn't excessively trollish or violating RD standards. The simple answer, and the answer to many similar questions here, is that it depends. Any label on ethnicity, nationality, regionality, race etc is arbitrary and ambiguous. Regional labels aren't necessarily logical. Parts of South America is located to the north of parts of Central America - Barranquilla (where the population is arguably South American) is located to the north of San José, Costa Rica (where the population is arguably Central American). Finland or Cyprus are usually not considered to be part of Eastern Europe, in spite of being to the east of several Eastern European countries. And so forth. As per the term 'Ibero-American', it exists, but is not commonly used to identify people (as it is superfluous to 'Latin American'). On way to get around the issue of whether some other countries like Suriname or Haiti should be included in Latin America or not is to use the term 'LAC' ('Latin America and the Caribbean') - this is similar to 'MENA' (Middle East and North Africa) which avoids the issue of whether Egypt belongs to Middle East (culturally and historically) or North Africa (in terms of Eurocentric geographic concepts). --Soman (talk) 16:31, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Any question that starts "I propose..." is necessarily suspect. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:10, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Example of use of 'Ibero-American' https://www.notimerica.com/cultura/noticia-autores-iberoamericanos-mas-influyentes-literatura-mundial-20160423075933.html --Soman (talk) 20:52, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Duties in the parish & respecting the Pope[edit]

Would a priest have other duties in the church parish than mass, funerals and weddings? And does he respect the Pope? 86.143.101.46 (talk) 18:39, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to the first question is yes. If we're talking about the Catholic church: here is a list of responsibilities of a parish priest. This includes, besides saying mass and presiding over funerals and weddings, they are responsible for educating their parishioners, adults and children, in the doctrine of the church, they are responsible for visiting the sick, for hearing confessions and offering penance, and to act as an administrator of their parish church (i.e. overseeing the rest of the staff and organization of the church itself), among other responsibilities you can read about. To answer the second question, if they are a Roman Catholic priest, they are supposed to respect the pope and his word and teachings. If they are of another Christian denomination that calls their clergy "priest", such as Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, or any others, than no, there is no requirement that they follow the teachings and guidance of the Pope. Furthermore, we can't know the mind of any one Catholic priest. Worldwide, there are some 400,000 Roman Catholic priests. They're supposed to respect the Pope. Is there one that does not? Probably. --Jayron 32 18:48, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The 19th-century British had a semi-sarcastic phrase to describe the regular tasks of a parish priest (other than holding services): "hatching, matching, and dispatching" (i.e. baptisms, weddings, and funerals). AnonMoos (talk) 19:04, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the Father Ted episode Cigarettes and Alcohol and Rollerblading, when John and Mary told Ted they might see his friend on holiday in Rome, he jokily gussed Sophia Loren. And when Mary said 'the Pope', Ted laughly said 'he's no friend of mine'. And when the couple gave him frowned/confused looks, he realized what he said was disrespectful and apolgised. In another episode Speed 3, when Dougal insisted he'd be a milkman, Ted tried to prevent this by claming that Dougal had other duties in the parish. And when Dougal asked 'like what?', Ted could not think of anything to say. 86.143.101.46 (talk) 19:42, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At the risk of stating the obvious, the underlying joke of Father Ted is that the priests behave in a way that priests ought NOT to behave. Alansplodge (talk) 11:49, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why did the UAE abstain?[edit]

I noticed in the Eleventh emergency special session of the United Nations General Assembly that China, India and the UAE abstained. For China and India, I know of their rationale, but not the UAE—why did the UAE abstain? I assume they have ties with Russia, but am curious on what these are. – Aza24 (talk) 18:40, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This analysis from the International Institute for Strategic Studies may be helpful. --Jayron 32 18:49, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]