Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2024 August 6

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous 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.

August 6

Weird social phenomenon

Why does a room full of people suddenly go silent at random points in time? TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 03:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Who says so? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Check it out.. manya (talk) 06:15, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Statistics? Conversations don't go non-stop, and the pauses may just line up at the same time. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:13, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

An angel has passed. --Error (talk) 16:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

River (typography). 91.234.214.10 (talk) 17:51, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

User:TrademarkedTWOrantula, you are mixing up multiple phenomenons and confusing it as a single experience. Please see salience, selective auditory attention, sensory memory, crowd psychology, and collective animal behavior. Like you, I have also witnessed the silence of crowds, but there are many different factors and reasons for this, some of which may be random, some of which may not. I would invite you to study this yourself up close and personal in a busy bar, restaurant, or club where the opportunity will present itself. For the most part, there are good explanations for the silences, which often involve a trigger or stimulus that the rest of the crowd will respond to with silence. There's also elements of spontaneous order and self-organization at work. What I've found is that people will often respond to or mimic what others are doing, probably without even thinking about it. This explains how a loud crowd in a restaurant or bar will suddenly go silent for no apparent reason. Viriditas (talk) 23:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I recall that forty years ago, people were commenting on this phenomenon, and claiming that it always occurred at 20 minutes past or to the hour (but not on the hour).^{, but none given.} Personally, I think it's fractal. See also Apophenia. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 22:05, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

The link provided by manya points to something called the protection postulate, which I vaguely remember hearing about. It is described as a period of time when "humans lapse into silence so that they can listen for danger in the manner of their prehistoric ancestors". Do we have an article on this or should I create one? Viriditas (talk) 22:08, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Long before clocks were invented, a covenant was concluded between our ancestors and their predators, regulating that predators would only attack 20 minutes after the hour. This not only explains why we collectively listen for immanent attacks not all the time but right then – it is chiseled into our collective unconscious – but also why cats, descendants of these prehistoric predators, go crazy for food 20 minutes after the hour. Of course we should document this important scientific theory that has been neglected if not maligned by the self-appointed guardians of "official" science.  --Lambiam 19:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree, it sounds ridiculous. Viriditas (talk) 00:28, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Random is clumpy. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 05:20, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

filming location

Here is a screenshot from the movie The Verdict with Paul Newman and I would like to know where this location can be found. https://s20.directupload.net/images/240806/hvvl8par.png Many locations in Boston and New York (Brooklyn Heights) have been identified, this one not. I think there's a church in the background. Thank you! --Chris06 (talk) 10:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boston or Reddit. Someone who has lived in Boston for a long time is likely to know - but areas like this have probably been regenerated since the 80s when it was filmed. I asked ChatGPT, it is pretty good at Geoguesser, but got very confident wrong/inconclusive answers. These sources might have more about The Verdict than is currently online: Boston Public Library, Digital Commonwealth (which focuses on Massachusetts), or maybe the Boston City Archives? Komonzia (talk) 05:47, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! --Chris06 (talk) 13:01, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Compile a list of sources

Moved from Wikipedia talk:AutoEd § Compile a list of sources

 – Aaron Liu (talk) 18:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Category of which I have been trying to get your attention or order for me to be able to get a free license

screensaver and competition enforcement services for business owners with a variety range from a broad country's financial environment Bookkeeping@Damiyo 41.121.25.255 (talk) 17:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I have read this four times I and have no idea or understanding of what you are asking for. ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Can I move this thread a second time? I don't think this is the proper venue for unintelligible word salad. Folly Mox (talk) 22:25, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

While we have no clue what the user who posted this is seeking, they will have no clue what happened to their question and won't see a reply posted here anyway.  --Lambiam 09:47, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

A report is being prepared for the coroner

Here's a news report from today's smorgasbord. Dot point 3 says "a report is being prepared for the coroner". I've seen this wording literally thousands of times ("is being prepared" and "will be prepared" are the usual formulations).

I have to wonder why news organisations feel the need to always tell us this. It's obviously a perfectly normal part of the procedure of investigating deaths that occur other than from natural causes. The police who attended the scene may have formed a strong opinion that the cause was suicide, or an accident, or foul play, or whatever. But it's not their call to make any sort of official announcement about the cause. That's the coroner's job. The way these sentences are worded suggests the readers are already aware of coroners and their role in the justice process, so telling us that a report is being prepared seems like one of those cases where "we do it this way because we've always done it this way, and nobody ever questions that, least of all the writers of these news items".

Is there actually any value in these statements? Is this solely an Australian thing? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:31, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I think there's two simple explanations. Firstly, the article you are referring to includes prepared copy that is provided by the authorities, often the investigating agencies, to the media for release. The news agencies then include this copy in their final publications; that's why you see it all the time. In the states, we have similar wording for similar releases. Beyond that, there are other, more significant reasons for the wording. This document from the state government of Indiana indicates how and why law enforcement works with the coroner, and spells out the nature of their relationship and shows how it goes well beyond just the two parties. I think if you look at that document, you'll get the sense that the wording of "a report is being prepared for the coroner" implies this working relationship is occurring and tells the public that due process is being followed. Viriditas (talk) 23:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I think of language like that as being an example of journalese in action. You can't just say that someone died, because the reader wants to know the cause of death, but you can't say what it is, because the report hasn't been released yet. So you fall back on the stock phrase.

The example I notice (in the U.S.) occurs almost every night on the television news. If there's been a bad house fire, that's automatically newsworthy, especially if there's video. Pretty much without exception, they close the segment on these stories with the words, "The cause of the fire is under investigation." It is, again, the journalist's way of telling you, "I know there's something you're wondering, and it's my job as a journalist to anticipate your questions and answer them in my report, but the cause of the fire isn't known yet. I'd tell you if I knew, really." —scs (talk) 13:53, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, scs. I guess that makes the most sense.

This isn't such a case, I now realise, but I'm just highly allergic to journos trotting out (what seem like) the same tired old cliches without apparently giving it much or any thought. The worst case is the reports of traffic fatalities. When the road toll takes a sudden jump due to multiple accidents in a short period, they tell us what the state's road toll is so far this year, and then give us a comparison with how many had died in the same period last year. I always wonder why that's relevant, as if whatever last year's stats were is any kind of benchmark. What if last year's running tally was higher than the long-term average, or lower? Anyway, that's my rant for the day. Cheers, and safe driving. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:48, 13 August 2024 (UTC)