Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2019 April 5

= April 5 =

Tax returns of Donald Trump
Do we have an article Tax returns of Donald Trump? Should one be started? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:23, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe if something actually happens. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:40, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Baseball Bugs. The returns are the subject of a heck of a lot of news pieces. A number of events have occurred, including his statement saying he would release them, then his statement saying otherwise, the recent subpoenas, the White House's refusal to comply, the legality of the refusal, the claims that their is an audit underway, and a few more things in various Wikipedia articles. Are you sure that is not enough? It may be a rug that really ties the room together. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:08, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again, Baseball Bugs. Okay, this is where you say "...well, if you were going to start it anyway, why ask..." :) The more articles I read, the more I think there is enough. Now, let's watch it get AfDd in about two seconds. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:17, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I actually think this is worth an article on its own, and I applaud you for starting it (although, oddly, you don't give me credit for starting the thread above which is presumably what started you thinking about this). This topic already has enough reliable sources for an article, and it will only get bigger. One thing though, you put that his 2015 returns were leaked.  It was actually 2005. Parts of the 1995 returns were also leaked, according to the WP article I linked to in my previous question above.  --Viennese Waltz 05:31, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Whoa! Viennese Waltz, sorry! Giant coincidence. I actually searched the refdesk for anything about it and it came up zero. How? I don't know. I'm terribly sorry. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:36, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * See? Nothing. Odd. Again, I'm very sorry. I'm going to read that post above now. Cheers. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:37, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries, thanks for the reply. And if you didn't see my previous thread, of course you don't need to apologize. --Viennese Waltz 05:45, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Viennese Waltz. Interesting post. Had I read it, I probably would have suggested starting the article. :) Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:53, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Don't forget to include "the legality of demanding them". Is it a done deal that Congress has that authority? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:40, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is. That's answered in the big, beautiful article we now have thanks to Anna.  I'm more interested in whether the IRS has the authority to refuse the request. --Viennese Waltz 07:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind words. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:07, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * So, what is this "1924 law"? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:07, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Never mind. Found it. 26 U.S. Code § 6103. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:09, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Has the constitutionality of that law ever been challenged? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Of note: That code states that the secretary of ways and means can request a tax return, but it must be in closed session. The purpose of requesting Trumps tax returns is to make them public for everyone to read, not shown in private where only a few people can see them and nobody could tell the world what they saw. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 22:04, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * If the House intends to make the returns public, it would seem Trump has a legitimate beef. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:48, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * There are some who would say he had illegitimate beef. -- Jayron 32 12:29, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The quality and the references for that article are quite impressive, given it was started just 3 days ago. --Lgriot (talk) 12:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Are you sure, at my calculation, it was started 1129 days ago. -- Jayron 32 12:50, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * He's talking about the tax returns article, not the steaks thing. --Viennese Waltz 01:01, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Mitt Romney's tax returns were also a topic of anticipation because of reports that he paid no federal taxes at all for many years, via dodges involving retirement accounts, charitable contributions, etc. I don't know if the relevant returns ever came out. I'd actually consider them to be more interesting than Trump's because of the stuff he was supposedly doing. Peter Thiel apparently did something similar with retirement accounts. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 23:58, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Fast-growing areas in Europe
Are there any parts of Europe where the population is growing extremely rapidly--as in, at the same rate that the U.S. states of Texas, Florida, and Utah are growing (13-14% over an 8-year time period)? To elaborate on what I mean here, please see this Wikipedia article: List of states and territories of the United States by population. Futurist110 (talk) 06:14, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Does the article List of European countries by population growth rate not meet your needs? -- Jayron 32 12:52, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I was hoping for more regional-level data, though. Futurist110 (talk) 22:53, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Does this work for you? -- Jayron 32 12:37, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it does. Thank you very much, Jayron32! Futurist110 (talk) 02:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)


 * But the answer already seems to be yes? (While it could be just an unusual year, a quick check of Demographics of Luxembourg seems to confirm it wasn't.) Did you actually want a list of all areas rather than an answer to a 'yes'/'no' question which was how your question was worded? Nil Einne (talk) 04:29, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do want a list of all regions (regions within countries--not countries themselves) where the population is growing at a very rapid pace. Futurist110 (talk) 20:27, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Nil Einne, while in strict logic what you say is true, amongst most native English speakers such a query is understood to be asking for details, not just a bald affirmation or negation. If in a restaurant a waiter asks you if you are ready to order, do you just say "Yes" and then fall silent? Such behaviour would usually be interpreted as either deliberately provocative or a symptom of non-neurotypicality. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 16:18, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, bingo. I want to know which specific regions (not countries, but regions within countries) of Europe are growing at such a rapid pace. Futurist110 (talk) 20:27, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It's many years since I've been in a restaurant (apart from Macdonalds).  In Macdonalds these days you can punch your order in on a screen.   Instead of a notebook, do waiters now record orders electronically?   If a waiter asked me "Are you ready to order?" and had a notepad or device in his hand I would wait for pencil to be poised or the device held at the ready before beginning. 2A00:23C0:7900:1C00:404:8C3F:2ADA:137D (talk) 18:17, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I very strongly disagree. Your example is completely different as it's not the sort of question asked in that context without more information expected. By comparison, if I were to ask the table, "are we ready to order", a simple "yes" will often be sufficient. And I am a native English speaker and never been diagnosed as non neurotypical. The simple fact is, that "Are there any parts of Europe where the population is growing extremely rapidly" is a completely reasonable question and one which many people may ask and only expect a fairly simple answer with as minimal details as needed. If the answer is yes, a single example will be enough to affirm this. This answer was already provided. They may often find any other examples of interest, but not always and in any case most of the time won't automatically expect them to be provided without making this clear. (It was, and remains unclear whether Futurist110 simply didn't notice this answer was provided, or is interested in as many examples as possible.)  Now, if the answer was no, this would be more complicated since the question would arise 'how you defined regions' or 'how many regions you looked at' since it may very well be that the answer is 'yes' under different definitions. Such complications did not arise here. However it's not unreasonable to point out if the answer is "no" at a country level, you're also interested in sub-country regions. The response suggests a possibility other examples we sought (especially the data part) but is unclear since it could simply be that the OP failed to parse that the answer was yes and if this was the point, it's written as if the question was clear that they are interested in as many examples as possible when this was not part of the original question.  To give an IMO far more similar example than your one, if some were to ask "Did Richard Nixon ever visit a mosque", it doesn't mean the person is interested in every time he did, if he did so more than once. A simple yes, in 1970 he visited he X mosque may will often be sufficient. Other examples may be of interest, but are not required to answer the question and generally if someone does want other examples when only one was provided, their response will be "Where there any other cases?" and not "So only the once then?" if someone only gives a single example and does not indicate it was the only time. If someone provides an article which talks about Nixon's presidency and mentions he visited a mosque somewhere, and the question asker were to say "I'm thinking of his entire life and not just his presidency", it would be unclear whether this means that the question asker simply didn't notice that the article mentioned he visited a mosque, or they are also interested in more cases where he may have visited a mosque.  Likewise if a friend asks me, "have you eaten yet?" in a lot of situations a simple "yes" will be sufficient. Definitely it's unlikely my friend will not be expect me to say "Yes I ate at a small McChicken combo at the McDonalds in the Glenfield Mall. It cost $8.50. The drink I had was a Coke Zero without ice. It tasted like a typical McChicken. I felt it was reasonably well put together, with a decent portion of lettuce and mayonnaise. I weighed it and it was 210g including the wrapper. My drink was 350g. The fries were 95 g and I did not have ketchup with them. I used the touch screen device to order at 2:04pm and received my order at 2:10pm. I finished my drink at 2:16 pm and finished eating at 2:18 pm."  Nil Einne (talk) 19:52, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Data on List of Indian states and territories by Human Development Index
Hello Wikipedia,

I had doubts regarding the HDI data on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_states_and_territories_by_Human_Development_Index#cite_note-:0-7.

The source you provided - https://globaldatalab.org/shdi/shdi/ - reveals data that is seemingly older than that on the Wiki page. I can't seem to find the source for the updated data on each Indian state and union territory.

Do reply soon,

Mohan Raghavan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohanraghavan (talk • contribs) 06:27, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Mohanraghavan. You are right, the numbers in the table do not match the numbers in the source given.
 * It looks like the numbers were all changed by user Afus199620 on Oct 23 2018 diff. The changes were immediately reverted by user Gazoth as uncited but Afus199620 promptly undid the revert. The users involved did not discuss on the talk page or with each other.
 * There are three approaches you might take.
 * (1) ask Afus199620 for their source, then add it to the article in place of reference [7].
 * (2) find the source that matches the current numbers on your own, then add it to the article in place of reference [7]. (Is this what you are asking the Ref Desk for?)
 * (3) change the data in the table to match the source we do have. Anyone can do this, including you, though volunteers here might also help. Please clarify what kind of help you need. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:58, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Famous in Later Life
I was hoping to find a list of people who had no notoriety at all through the first half of their lives but then became famous in the second half. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.40.58 (talk) 11:36, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Try this. -- Jayron 32 12:17, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * We also have an article at late bloomer. The article begins by discussing the original sense of the term (i.e. a child with a developmental delay), but then branches out into adults who achieved success later in life. The classic example there is Grandma Moses. Matt Deres (talk) 12:56, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Surely this would apply to almost everybody who became famous before dying no older than around 40 (and a great many others who died older). Proportionally, very few people become famous before they reach 20. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 16:57, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * No contradiction, and yet not impossible that a number of us will prefer to use the same sort of approximations ( conclusions from the NHS ). --Askedonty (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Misuse of Wikisource as an encyclopedia
How common (and why) is it to use Wikisource incorrectly as an encyclopedia?? (To understand this, please note that there are a few Wikisource pages saying that "this page is something to be moved to Wikipedia" in a template.) Georgia guy (talk) 12:53, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Georgia.guy. What's the exact wording or name of the template? (Asking because there are no results for a search on your phrase in template space. ) Knowing that, it is probably possible to generate a list of all the pages that have that template on them, which would begin to answer the "how common" question. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:23, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Here are 2 such pages:


 * 1) Punch and Judy Comics
 * 2) America's Best Comics

Georgia guy (talk) 16:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * There are Four pages at en.wikisource that use that template. So, to answer your question of "how common is it" the answer is "not common at all".  Also, this does not presume that the pages at wikisource are tagged appropriately; there's no real way to tell, unless someone tags a page, which wikisource pages should be transwikied, AND there's also no guarantee that those pages were correctly tagged, but the only meaningful way to research your question, without manually checking all 432,269 texts stored there as pages, is to use the stats on the use of that template. -- Jayron 32 17:27, 5 April 2019 (UTC)