Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2015 September 21

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

September 21

What is this?

What is this?

What is this old object? Something to do with a gas line? Water line? or??? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 02:39, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

A water hydrant. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (もしもし！) 02:46, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

(EC)Looks like a fire protection valve to shut off or allow water flow in an underground pipeline. Not a hydrant; where would you screw a firehose onto it?. See [1] and [2] Edison (talk) 02:56, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

It is next to a building built in 1923. The window says "OPEN". So maybe it is for the water to the sprinkler system. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 03:11, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Looking at your links, that is what it is. Thanks. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 03:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Resolved

Any reference archives or libraries suggestions?

Good Morning,

The article a friend has asked me to write has been rejected for lack of outside references twice. The references for the article, with the exception of original documents, seem to have never been archived by the agencies involved, or have been removed by these governments and global organizations. The people involved in the events of the article for submission can be established as real, but in unrelated references to those I am trying to document.

Does anyone know of a records repository for northeastern African land records, 2003 - Present? I have tried State Department Records, various national archives, World Bank, newspapers and countless African resource data bases to no avail. I am also currently trying to contact several universities for possible scholarly works that may be of use.

Thank you for any helpful suggestions, Content Secretary, Latar Territory 09:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Latar-ms (talk • contribs)

From what you have written here, is difficult for us to offer suggestions. At the very top right-hand corner of your talk page you should see a link to Sandbox. Place the text of your proto-article there (so we can see it without it being deleted). Then ask questions about it at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions . Linking discussion to your proto-article in your sandbox at User talk:Latar-ms/sandbox. (Note to other editors. I didn't read the rejected article but I guess it was rejected as Original Research due to reliance on primary sources only. It may well be, that in this case, (do to its nature) good Secondary' are going to be hard to find. This comment is quite different to the question of whether it turns out to be encyclopedic or not. If we know exactly where this editor is situated, we may be able to pass it over to a WP that covers his part of African and where local editors can take over and help him out.) --Aspro (talk) 11:16, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

According to the notes on the user's talk page, it was deleted due to lack of notability. 64.235.97.146 (talk) 16:23, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

African land records (about real estate) is likely to be more notable to the pepole living there than an article about Pok Pok or any other little local US eateries. We should avoid Wikipedia:Systemic bias and guide this new editor. Perhaps to creating an article on a WP in his own local language. --Aspro (talk) 18:15, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

The OP appears to be trying to write an article on a micronation, not about northeast African land records on real estate. Of course notability is ultimately determine by sources. If there are insufficient coverage in reliable secondary sources, whatever the origin or language of those sources, then it isn't WP:notable by en.wikipedia standards. Reliable secondary sources for many African subjects are harder to find, but they generally do exist if the subject is notable. Land records, are probably not that. P.S. I wouldn't be surprised if "random British and American partnership buys land which no one really seems to care about from some random north-east African people and sends a letter to various people who don't care, annoucing they are forming a micronation which no one other than other micronations recognise" is of more interest to wealthier people in the west than it is to most people living in Africa, or even north-east Africa near this micronation. Nil Einne (talk) 18:48, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

One can't get much smaller than the Principality of Sealand. Yet it has an article.--Aspro (talk) 23:11, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

The size of it has makes no difference whatsoever. ALL that matters is are there good sources about it we can use to research for and write a Wikipedia article. All other metrics are irrelevant. --Jayron32 00:52, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Yeah not sure how size came in to it. Micronations are small, but their relative size to each other rarely affects their notability, people don't generally write about a micronation because it's large or refuse to write about it because it's small. Even the absolute size isn't generally the defining feature of a micronation, even if micronation may originate from the term small nation. Their defining feature is they're barely recognised by anyone and only generally survive based on the fact whichever recognised countries who claim the territory don't care enough to interfere (or they do, but they can't do anything based on the current practices of the micronations and current laws of those countries), and are often mostly of interest to tourists and other wealthier people interested in "human interest stories", than many people living nearby. We have plenty of articles on micronations, but most of these hopefully have significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Incidentally, I fairly doubt Sealand is even close to the smallest micronation, or even the smallest micronation that we have an article on, Grand Duchy of Avram and Empire of Atlantium don't even claim any territory and Talossa claims to be larger now but was once only someone's bedroom. (Actually people are probably more likely to write about some 14 year old forming a micronation in their bedroom then they are to write about a slightly larger claim by some random person, although the former may be WP:BLP1E.) Nil Einne (talk) 07:09, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

North-east African land records? Is this yet another claim on Bir Tawil? AlexTiefling (talk) 20:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

No, or at least the territory claimed by the Latar Territory and Principe is on the coast of Somalia specifically I think on the coast of Ras Kaamba Kiyaambo [3] [4] [5]. Which reminds me, I should have mentioned above another reason is the international recognised goverment may lack the ability to interfere due to having significant problems controlling even larger parts of their country they're more concerned about. Of course, this one area where the micro part does come in to it. If you're a large area like Somaliland or Puntland forming a self declared state with some degree of functioning government, you're generally going to have a significant effect on so will be discussed in reliable secondary sources. For micronations this isn't necessarily the case. On the flip side, I forgot to mention before but if the recognised government does care enough to try and interfere, even if they can't under current laws or simply because they lack the ability, then this will often result in sufficient reliable secondary source coverage that. Nil Einne (talk) 20:42, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Soldier's leg

Just noticed that the left leg of the soldier in the foreground, at the center, as well as some others' on the photo for some reason do not completely rest on the ground, as would be expected from dead bodies. Is it because of high boots, broken bones or something else? --Brandmeister^talk 22:00, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't think the back of your knee normally rests on the ground in that position. It's a function of the size of the calf and thigh muscles, I suppose. StuRat (talk) 00:33, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, you can check it yourself by lying on a firm surface. To me, those legs appear flexed as if the muscles were contracted and not completely relaxed. Brandmeister^talk 08:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Cadaveric_spasm maybe? 196.213.35.146 (talk) 09:23, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

In that position and on that surface, if he had died with his knees slightly bent (not unlikely due to pain, etc), his boot heels would likely dig into the ground and maintain the position. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 185.74.232.130 (talk) 13:07, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

The 'relaxed' position of a leg isn't to be straight - a small amount of bend is normal. Look (for example) at pictures of people floating around in free-fall on the International Space Station - their legs take on that natural bend angle when they are completely relaxed too. SteveBaker (talk) 13:20, 22 September 2015 (UTC)