Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2021 January 12

= January 12 =

Number of US Capitol rioters
What are best estimates for the number of rioters in the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol (either all participants or just those who stormed / broke into the building)? I'm not seeing it in the article and googling was inconclusive. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 15:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * About 2000 people were present at the rally beforehand: . However, 1) not all of those who were at the rally later stormed the Capitol and 2) Many who stormed the Capitol were not at the rally.  -- Jayron 32 16:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree that coming to an accurate number is going to be difficult and depends greatly on what you consider participants. I don’t think there are accurate counts unless you just want the raw number of people that were present that day. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 22:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The 2,000 figure you quoted was the estimated attendance at the Tuesday evening rally, the night before the storming of the Capitol. The Wednesday morning Save America March rally was originally permitted for 10,000 attendees, but that was increased to 30,000 "based on responses and people already in the D.C. area as of Tuesday". I've not been able to find official attendance estimates, though this AP Photo (6000x4000 -- here is a 876x584 version) gives a sense of the multitude.  (It appears in many articles, including Trump addresses supporters at DC rally ahead of Congress vote certification; NY Post, January 6, 2021, 12:11pm.) -- ToE 05:48, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This is a realy good question and I've been looking too. I recall on the day two journalists tweeting that there were over 100,000 on the streets in the wake of the Wednesday morning rally, which could be the case from the photo ToE posts, but the news articles don't seem to give any figures. BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:03, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I assume that at some point more information will be released, but it would be interesting to know 1) how many people attended the rally/march, 2) how many people breached the outer security perimeter surrounding the Capitol, and 3) how many people breached the Capitol building itself. I'm under the impression that the answers will be tens of thousands, thousands, and hundred, respectively, but I've found no sources even trying to estimate it. -- ToE 19:46, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Cheque Payment
A request from Germany: Some weeks ago, I got a FoIA request approved by the CIA. The problem is now payment, as the CIA allows only cheque or money order. And these two are almost extinct in Europe, so I could not find a bank to pay it. Question to the readers here, is there a possibility to pay in this pay from Europe?--Antemister (talk) 18:04, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, I’m looking at Bestätigter_Bundesbank-Scheck and Geldanweisung. Both say Deutsche Bundesbank offer

s both services, which sounds like member banks should too…? Checking the websites of the banks at List of banks in Germany, the first one, BayernLB, has a Schecks page which certainly sounds like it offers the service – so that’s one, anyway. If you cannot access that particular bank, you might check the others on the list. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 18:56, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I tried that, and either the banks tell that they have abolished that service years ago or they offer them only to long-term costumers. The Bundesbank and BayernLB are state banks without services to individuals. What I am looking for is something like a non-bank payment service.--Antemister (talk) 19:40, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry Antemister. I know it's frustrating when you get an answer that you'd tried. I was misled by the list format into thinking that BayernLB was a regular bank. Did you also ask the CIA what European-compatible payment methods they accept? 70.67.193.176 (talk) 19:52, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did. The reply was just "use a cheque or money order".--Antemister (talk) 20:10, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Only costumers? Man, German banks are really restrictive. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:18, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Not a native speaker! But these mistakes you'll also find in my Derman texts.--Antemister (talk) 21:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)


 * @Antemister: If you’re a Volksbank customer, they supposedly offer a service called TIPA to cheque (but I haven’t tried it myself). Grüße ⌘  hugarheimur 20:30, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @hugarheimur: Yes, this could maybe work (am a Volksbank costumer, they told me that there is no overseas cheque service anymore weeks ago, will try again, probably the guy did not know about that)--Antemister (talk) 21:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This site might be useful: -- 107.15.157.44 (talk) 20:34, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * These service are not helpful here, because I do not have a bank account number. With bank account it is easy, because there are now many such service providers.--Antemister (talk) 21:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Some of them have 'direct bank payment' option. Doesn't that mean you walk into a bank with cash-in-hand? Have you tried talking to someone at  a bank? 107.15.157.44 (talk) 21:40, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This Reddit thread looks potentially helpful. Came up with a search for "Germany money order". --47.152.93.24 (talk) 22:31, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk to the US-Consulate near you - if they will take calls at all. Bahnmoeller (talk) 23:02, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I thought there was such a thing as an international money order, which you can buy at a post office. 2601:648:8202:96B0:0:0:0:313A (talk) 06:52, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


 * An international money order sounds like a simpler option.--Shantavira|feed me 08:44, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, the German Post no longer offers that service (Internationale Zahlungsanweisung). And I seem to remember that Western Union doesn’t allow making out a Money Order to an organisation (as opposed to a physical person). Cheers ⌘  hugarheimur 09:07, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Have tried both, does not work.--Antemister (talk) 17:32, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Arrange for someone in the US to pick up a US postal money order for the amount, and send it to you in exchange for the same amount by Bitcoin or Paypal or whatever? Then you send it to the CIA. How much are you talking about anyway? If it's a small amount for a good cause that's of public interest, maybe someone will just donate it. 2601:648:8202:96B0:0:0:0:313A (talk) 03:18, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Edward C. Ash
Can anyone kindly furnish a death date for the author Edward C. [Cecil] Ash? He's d:Q79423811 on Wikidata, where some biographical metadata is recorded. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * A fairly thorough Google search failed to reveal a date; his passing seems to have gone unnoticed by the internet. Alansplodge (talk) 11:57, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 21 November 1938. He was found dead in a gas-filled room at his home at Manston, Kent by his wife.(Thanet Advertiser, 22 November 1938, East Kent Times and Mail, 23 November 1938 (obit)). Coroner's verdict was suicide "when his mind was disturbed".(Thanet Advertiser 25 November 1938, East Kent Times and Mail 30 November 1938) Davidships (talk) 21:20, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Getting a super-condor in golf
Wikipedia's article Par (score) revealed that today a condor was achieved on a par 6. Because par 6's are rare, the only way to get a condor on most golf courses is a hole-in-one on a par 5. A condor is indeed a very difficult achievement. But is it possible that someone might make a super-condor somewhere along the line?? That would have to be a hole-in-one on a par 6, which is indeed extremely rare because par 6's themselves are rare. (There are also a few par 7's, and a super-condor on such a hole would be 2, but they're not in English-speaking countries.)

Very important note for anyone who posts in this section the statement "I would prefer you say double condor"; please note that that term is naturally confusing because it would technically mean 8 under par, which is impossible in general because it would require the totally non-existent par 9 hole. "Super-condor" is clearly less confusing. Georgia guy (talk) 21:13, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Large-scale United States military interventions that were seriously considered and proposed but ultimately rejected?
Which large-scale United States military interventions were seriously considered and proposed but ultimately rejected throughout United States history? Futurist110 (talk) 22:46, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * What is large-scale, and when do considerations become serious? Towards the end of October 1962, thermonuclear war between the USA and the USSR was on the verge of breaking out, but does killing a third of humanity and ending civilization as we know it qualify as a "military intervention"? --Lambiam 23:30, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yep, it certainly does! Futurist110 (talk) 23:41, 12 January 2021 (UTC)


 * War Plan Red may be of interest. DuncanHill (talk) 23:48, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yep. Also Category:United States color-coded war plans and Operation Dropshot. Futurist110 (talk) 03:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan is sadly a redlink, but see here. Web search finds more info. 2601:648:8202:96B0:0:0:0:313A (talk) 06:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


 * By design, the military PLANS for a lot of weird things. There was even a plan for how to handle a zombie attack filed away by the National Guard in Texas (and, yes, they knew it was a joke). There are plans for defending against all kinds of weird attacks. There are plans for implementing all kinds of attacks. I am likely too old to take part in any discussion here, but from my day we had some odd things that came into the news. They were reported as factual, but I'm sure they have been debunked over time because everything interesting is eventually debunked. Churchill wanted to make a floating air station out of ice. The U.S. Air Force trained pigeons to guide missiles. In Vietnam, we had thunderbombs. They caused clouds to rain. The goal was to flood the enemy. That actually did get used, so it wasn't rejected. I'm sure there are many others that took place after the 70s that others here might remember. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The JSCP was not a plan concocted as an exercise and buried in a drawer. It was for real, and Ellsberg's discovery of it and his report to then-President Kennedy is described with considerable drama in Kai Bird's book The Color of Truth, which is about the Bundy brothers (McGeorge and Bill), who were both powerful figures in the 1960s.  2601:648:8202:96B0:0:0:0:313A (talk) 03:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Who are these women (and one man)
Commons:Category:Kirsten Gillibrand visits Georgia State Capitol to protest new abortion law (May 16, 2019)

 P5150033 (40898461953).jpg P5150037 (32920877077).jpg P5150040 (47865025711).jpg|Possibly Teri Anulewicz and ? P5150044 (33987742048).jpg P5150053 (32920877887).jpg P5150060 (47865026871).jpg P5150063 (46948836285).jpg| P5150067 (47075560214).jpg|Nikema Williams and Eva Lathrop P5150070 (47075560994).jpg|?, ? , Mary Robichaux, Mary Margaret Oliver P5150073 (33987744338).jpg|Jen Jordan and Bee Nguyen P5150088 (46948840065).jpg|Bee Nguyen, ? , and Dar'shun Kendrick P5150127 (32920883337).jpg|Eva Lathrop P5150130 (47865031161).jpg|Nikema Williams and Eva Lathrop

Please rename after positive identification.

I think one of them is Bee Nguyen, the image in her article is out of focus Bahnmoeller (talk) 22:57, 12 January 2021 (UTC)--
 * My in-depth investigation shows that the one with the "Mary Robichaux" nametag is...Mary Robichaux. More seriously, the doctor with Nikema Williams is apparently Eva Lathrop. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:49, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Please stick the name to the image. Bahnmoeller (talk) 11:58, 13 January 2021 (UTC)