Humanities desk
< March 5	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	Current desk >

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.

March 6[edit]

State of Palestine[edit]

The Wikipedia page is called State of Palestine. I know this is controversial, but what was the agreement that brought this "state" into existence? Just asking, I don't mean to start any arguments. Mr Reading Turtle (talk) 17:38, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're way too late to start any arguments. Amongst other places, you can find the discussions at Talk:State of Palestine/Archive 6#Requested_rename (move), Talk:State of Palestine/Archive 10#Proposal to rename article to "History of the State of Palestine", Talk:State_of_Palestine/Archive_12#Requested move 5 August 2015 and Talk:State of Palestine/Archive 15#Requested move 23 October 2017. In case I've mangled any of them, see the yellow box at the top of Talk:State of Palestine. --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 17:49, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NB per WP:PIA, "All IP editors, accounts with fewer than 500 edits, and accounts with less than 30 days tenure are prohibited from editing any page that could be reasonably construed as being related to the Arab-Israeli conflict." --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 18:02, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, the relevant Wikipedia articles are United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 and International recognition of the State of Palestine... AnonMoos (talk) 01:53, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes. The question was ambiguous. I assumed they meant the agreement on Wikipedia, not in real life. You're probably right. Thanks, AnonMoos. --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 07:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Two Questions on some of Art on Romancing SaGa[edit]

Hello,

I am not sure if this is the correct section but im putting it here because it relates to art, and I apologise If the links are not allowed

My first question is this

Emperors SaGa is a mobile game based on the SaGa series released only in Japan. Tomomi Kobayashi does the art, or prominent character designs, for this series but there is some art in there that is clearly not from her.

Im looking for the name of the artist who made the art that appears on the left card (description: a few characters in black and white) around 3:17. https://www.nicovideo.jp/watch/sm31111692

There is some other art throughout the SaGa mobile games, that might be from the same artist ( like this: https://saga.fandom.com/wiki/Subier?file=Subier_%2528Emperors_SaGa%2529.jpg) however I am not sure, and im mostly looking for the former artist.

My second question is this

The credits for the Romancing Saga video games generally list Tomomi Kobayashi as the character desginer. However if you look at her art for Wagnas (https://saga.fandom.com/wiki/Wagnas), which looks like a watercolour drawing, and the art in game, or the sprite if you will, for Wagnas, while derived from Tomomi Kobayashi's drawn design, is clearly different. Who is the person who is making the designs of the characters, ( enemies and such, like Wagnas) as they appear in the game? Im sppseifically seeking names for Romancing SaGa 2 and Romancing Saga 3.

Thank you for your help 99.123.152.104 (talk) 18:16, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is "the left card" the image seen here more sharply (not the clumsy oil painting but the second image), and here as a card? Unfortunately, neither source identifies the artist. --Lambiam 10:57, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is the card im talking about, at least ill have the art! Maybe asking Square Enix is my best shot.

thank you for your help 2600:1700:7830:DE40:C0EB:F1ED:D3AA:7B6D (talk) 16:48, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General Assembly members[edit]

Who makes up the United Nations General Assembly? Is it each country's UN ambassador? United Nations General Assembly#Membership talks about member countries, not the individuals who sit in the seats. 49.198.51.54 (talk) 19:16, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is the ambassadors; deputies (substitutes) may fill in from time to time. DOR (HK) (talk) 21:28, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The members are the countries, but in the sessions of the General Assembly each member is represented by a delegation of up to five representatives.^[1] In practice a delegation can include up to five alternate representatives and be assisted by any number of advisers and experts.^[2] It is entirely up to a member state to determine the composition of their delegation as they see fit. Usually it will include the ambassador, who acts as the chair of the delegation, but this is not a requirement. --Lambiam 21:52, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

However you can get disputes over who in the member state is entitled to appoint the delegation. This has came up in recent times with both Myanmar and Afghanistan who are still represented by delegations appointed by the previous governments before a military coup in Myanmar and Taliban succeeded in their civil war in Afghanistan resulted in new de facto governments who attempted to replace these or at least the ambassadors, so far without success. See e.g. [3]

The Afghanistan case has been particularly interesting as due to resignation of the ambassador, there has been dispute over who represents them outside moves by the Taliban to appoint their own representative. [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] (Probably partly because the military already had significant involvement in the Myanmar government, early attempts there were simply to replace the ambassador with his deputy but this failed after the deputy resigned. [9] [10]).

As this article mentions [11] there can be a lot of behind the scenes horse-trading etc between competing powers in coming to some sort of consensus. But as I understand it, in theory the United Nations Credentials Committee reports to the UN General Assembly who then vote based in theory on this report [12]. (I'm not sure if the currently recognised representative gets to vote for the country where there is dispute.)

You can of course get dispute over representatives outside of the UN General Assembly e.g. there has been recent controversy over the International Court of Justice and Myanmar. [13] [14] [15]

And just to emphasise the point, probably the most well known case of a dispute over who is entitled to appoint representatives would be China and the United Nations, a founding member and permanent member of the UN Security Council. For over 2 decades, the UN still recognised the Republic of China government rather than the People’s Republic of China government. When this finally changed in 1971, AFAIK there had been little change internally over who controlled what etc for those 2 decades+, however other countries had increasingly recognised the PRC over the ROC, culminating in 1971 with the US finally deciding to do the same. The situation since then has been with that decision and the One-China policy, the ROC have had no place at the UN. (See also Political status of Taiwan.)

Nil Einne (talk) 07:49, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The most embarrassing UN representation dispute is that what was basically a continuation of the Pol Pot regime was allowed to hold Cambodia's UN seat through the 1980s and into the 1990s, though they didn't have de facto territorial control, and very few or no countries thought that they were the legitimate government of Cambodia or wanted them back in power in Cambodia... AnonMoos (talk) 17:36, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]