Wiki143:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Template:Short description {{Wikipedia:Reference desk/header|WP:RD/M}}

November 10

Are there sources proving that Torres Strait Islanders are not Aboriginal Australians?

Can you please provide me sources of Torres Strait Islanders being distinct to Aboriginal Australians, if there is. ~2025-32680-48 (talk) 19:08, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

It is, at least to me, not entirely clear what kind of statements these sources should contain. I believe that British people are distinct from Belgians (as a group – some individuals may straddle the fence), but I think you will be hard-pressed to find a source stating this as a fact in a straightforward way.  ​‑‑Lambiam 21:53, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

I need a source so the latest edit request on Talk:Black people to be implemented. ~2025-32297-74 (talk) 22:13, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

There are certainly sources indicating that e.g. the 2021 Australian census distinguishes between the two, and includes both in the broader grouping 'Indigenous Australians'. [1] See also my response on Talk:Black people. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:59, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

~2025-32680-48

The International Handbook of the Demography of Race and Ethicity (2015) p. 602 says:

Template:Xt

Alansplodge (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

"Distinct" in what sense? Legally? Culturally? Genetically? Something else? How would it be measured? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:43, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

November 16

Remastering audio from a Shirley Temple movie?

How did this dude pull it off prior to the likes of machine learning and gen-AI becoming mainstream (the video was published in 2019)? It's not like they had access to something akin to the MAL model in "Now and Then" which removed the mains noise from Lennon's recording, yet it sounded at least vaguely like someone brought Shirley to a modern recording studio and let her have it. Blake Gripling (talk) 01:51, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

The art of digital remastering precedes the use of generative AI for such purposes. For the approach that may have been used, see the version of Remaster § Music as it was at the time the video clip was posted. I do not know how its audio quality compares to that of the song on the 2009 DVD of Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm.  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:31, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Photography prevention?

File:Fernand Léger, 1910, Nudes in the forest (Nus dans la forêt), oil on canvas, 120 x 170 cm, Kröller-Müller Museum.jpg

Fernand Léger, Nudes in the forest (1910), Kröller-Müller Museum

This image of Léger's painting is used in three articles and has made its way elsewhere on the internet. It originated with a commons upload in 2015. But, the painting may not appear like this at all. In most books and printed literature it has earth tones.[2] Curious, I went on a virtual tour of the museum on YouTube. I noticed that the gallery containing this painting has an unusual bluish light and color cast, both on the walls of the room and possibly coming from the lighting itself. Is this a way for them to discourage photography (and flash), such that any photo taken of the painting will look quite different from the actual work? Viriditas (talk) 20:37, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

If anything, such a strategy would encourage the use of flash, as a flash user would be bringing their own light, with its own controlled color temperature and spectrum.

Of course, the tools to digitally correct color are so widely available that there would be little point to trying to obfuscate an image in this way. And I would be very surprised to see an art museum that deliberately chose to distort the appearance of a work that way—curators tend to be very hot on respecting the integrity of the artist's work and vision.

Seems more likely that the illumination in that space happened to have a slightly different color balance for non-malicious, non-strategic reasons. Though it's hard to provide a reference to support that answer; I doubt that the museum's curator has gone on the record to say "No, we're not doing anything weird with our lights." TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:39, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

One more thought just came to mind. Is it possible that the piece has yellowed somewhat over the last century-plus, and the bluer-blue whiter-white version is an attempt to more closely reflect the original colors of the work? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:05, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but I recall reading older reviews that mentioned the earth tones. Also, most museums do a restore after some time. I would be very surprised if this painting hasn't been restored since the 1970s. Viriditas (talk) 23:50, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

I've been to the Kröller-Müller Museum on a number of occasions (including two school excursions; I think everybody in the Netherlands has been there at least once on a school excursion), although I don't remember seeing this painting. I seem to remember that many rooms in this museum are lit primarily by daylight, either through big windows or skylights with milkglass. The continuous spectrum of daylight gives a better colour rendering index than any kind of artificial light. This means that lighting conditions change with cloud cover and the height of the sun. Human eyes adapt easily, but this may throw off the white balance of a camera. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:43, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

That's super interesting. I wonder if that explains the cool green-blue tones. Viriditas (talk) 22:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

The version uploaded to the Commons is a scaled-down version of what the website of the Kröller-Müller museum had at the time; the current museum version is markedly different. They can be compared here: comparison, the Commons version on top and the current museum version, scaled to the same size, below.

The hues and brightness of versions found on the Web are all over the place, but those that appear to be photos of reproductions tend to be brighter and have more earth colours. I found an outlier in size and clarity on Facebook, which can be seen here. I could not find its provenance, but this can hardly be the result of sprucing up the gloomy low-contrast image at the museum site. I guess someone needs to get to the museum to see the actual colours.  ​‑‑Lambiam 11:30, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Are you familiar with Yellow Milkmaid Syndrome? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:45, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Vaguely. I first became aware of a similar issue in the domain of music in the mid-1980s. Without mentioning any names, I used to frequent a record store in the Bay Area which, if you got to know the people working there, trafficked in underground bootlegs. That's when the first problem occurred to me. In many cases, you had these terrible recordings of famous bands floating around when the bands themselves had soundboard-quality reproductions that they couldn't or wouldn't release. Viriditas (talk) 21:04, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

November 17

Mystery structure in a Welsh field

File:Concrete stand overlooking the Loughor valley - geograph.org.uk - 552694.jpg

Concrete stand overlooking the Loughor valley

Can we identify what this is, and its purpose? It's at Template:Coord.

I thought it might cap a mine- or ventilation shaft, but I can't see anything on old Ordnance Survey maps, and I have only just added it as a generic "building:yes" to OpenStreetMap. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:42, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Sometimes random concrete blocks are remnants of wartime defences, but there's nothing on the Extended Defence of Britain Database which is pretty comprehrensive (but there is a Type 24 pillbox a couple of miles south of there). Alansplodge (talk) 18:31, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

There is a recent gas pipeline nearby (there is a view of its construction in the "nearby" on Geograph, where the picture came from), perhaps something to do with that. DuncanHill (talk) 19:04, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

A search for similar images brings up mostly WWII military installations. But they all either have small openings or show signs that something used to be mounted on top. The few images that don't fit that pattern include a mine building, a milk churn stand and an old water tank with the last looking the most similar. Long is the way (talk) 07:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

The thing appears to be located at a local maximum in terrain elevation. If this is to cap a shaft, the shaft would have been shorter (and presumably easier to construct and cheaper) if they had moved it a short distance in any direction. A maximum in elevation could be convenient for a liquid storage tank, as one can use gravity to move liquid from there to anywhere (but it's harder to fill). The good view from there and limited soil movement (no downhill direction at a local maximum) make it useful as a reference point for the Ordnance Survey (one could put a big theodolite on it), but would it not be indicated on the Ordnance Survey map then? There's also the option of something unfinished. It doesn't look very recent, mid 20th century is plausible. The top layer may be more recent and could be hiding bolts or other attachment points.

The thing appears too small for a pillbox. PiusImpavidus (talk) 11:30, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

There seems to be an irregular ring of smallish stones around the construction. This prompts me to wonder if the 'box' might have been placed to protect something of possible archaeological interest pending later excavation (for which funding might not have materialised). Its lack of presence on OS maps argues against this, unless it was only identified in the mid-20th century, if not later, and immediately covered over. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 14:39, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

That very land appears to be for sale, though I cannot identify the object in any of the estate agent's pictures. They might answer a query on the matter?

Given it is on a high point of sorts, I wondered if it was intended as the base of an aerial? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 16:08, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

We could buy it and have a RefDesks country break! DuncanHill (talk) 18:22, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Where'd you go for the weekend?

Oh, we had a lovely time sitting on the wet grass around a weird concrete block in a Welsh field.

Sounds wonderful. Count me in next time. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 16:48, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Milk churn stands are generally next to roads, they were placed so that the churns could be quickly transferred to a lorry doing its rounds; but this is nowhere near a road. A water tank seems more likely. Alansplodge (talk) 13:37, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps a herd of sheep were killed by a stray bomb? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 14:48, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

November 18

Villanov?

In The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 1st ed., vol. 10, p. 108 entry on Nikolai Klenovsky: "[...] and it was in fact to Klenovsky that Vsevolozhsky (director of the imperial theatres) first offered The Queen of Spades as a subject for an opera; only when he failed to make any progress with the idea was the libretto passed first to Villanov and finally to Tchaikovsky." Here it mentions a composer named Villanov. There doesn't seem to be anyone named Villanov, so who is this? Check it out for yourself here (you need to borrow it). WafflesInvasion (talk) 11:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

This page (not the photograph) seems to be about him, well, google-translate mentions the Queen of Spades, so yeah. You could use the cyrillic Александр Александрович Вилламов to find more about him. --Wrongfilter (talk) 11:46, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Seems like the case, Villanov might be a typo. Russian Wikipedia for Queen of Spades mentions a "А. А. Вилламов." WafflesInvasion (talk) 11:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

(ec) John Warrack's Tchaikovsky (1973) says:

• … Kandaurov sent his material to another minor composer, known chiefly as the writer of little salon pieces, A. A. Villanov. ("Travels and the Break", p. 235)

Tchaikovsky Research: Queen of Spades was more useful:

• The only established fact is that towards the end of 1886, Kandaurov offered his scenario to a Petersburg socialite composer Aleksandr Villamov (1838-1917).

It goes on to provide more detail of the dealings between these people.

But note the spelling difference: Tchaikovsky Research has VillaMov, not VillaNov. This seems correct, as The Lieder Net Archive has an entry for a composer named Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Villamov, who set various texts to music as songs. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:53, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

I guess the Grove dictionary entry above used a source like Warrack's. WafflesInvasion (talk) 11:58, 18 November 2025 (UTC)