Humanities desk
< March 20	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 22 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities 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.

March 21

old threshing techniques

How would threshing have been done in the 1200's?--Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:41, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're in luck. Our article on flail includes an image from 1270. --Dweller (talk) 12:53, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that DID answer my question. Thanks!--Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:59, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't they do well! Itsmejudith (talk) 00:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

how can scully still be sceptical

how can scully still be sceptical about paranormal phenomena when she has actually seen and been attacked by so much of it, when she has been abducted by aliens herself and had a chip put in her and mulder has been abducted as well and lots of people she know have been killed or abducted and she has seen things float through the air and a stretcy man try to eat her liver but still she doesn't believe in any of it, it the because she is secretly mental?? Horatio Snickers (talk) 22:12, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This probably fits better on the /Entertainment desk...but I'll note that this would be a question about The X-Files and Dana Scully for anyone who might not understand the question. --Onorem ♠Dil 22:34, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like a question Bowei Huang would ask. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:45, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

this is a question about x files not about bowels. stop dragging the discussion into the gutter@@@@ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horatio Snickers (talk • contribs) 22:57, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And that response sounds like a troll. RNealK (talk) 03:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So you are asking us why a fictional character behaves the way she does? Unless the writer has said something in public about the matter, I don't see how this is a kind of question the Ref Desk can answer. --ColinFine (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the most accurate answer that we can provide is, "That's the way the writers wanted it." Dismas|^(talk) 00:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We can say the obvious: It's all about the dramatic needs of a TV series. If Scully stops being skeptical, the writers lose a big part of the dramatic conflict between the two main characters. As TV tropes go, it's Arbitrary Skepticism meets Status Quo is God. —Kevin Myers 05:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that the number of paranormal things Scully has seen still is much much much smaller than the number of reported paranormal claims that are mistakes or scams. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 06:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is part of a larger problem I've seen with many long-run series. They define the characters initially but fail to update them based on their experiences in each episode. The writers may do this intentionally, as they don't want to mess with a winning formula, and also want people to be able to watch any episode, out of order, without having to know what happened previously. Or, the writers may just be too lazy to redefine the characters.

Sometimes characters who "never learn" are kept that way intentionally, for comic effect, such as Charlie Brown never learning not to try to kick the football that Lucy holds for him, Linus never learning not to wait for the Great Pumpkin, and Fibber McGee never learning not to open the closet full of junk which always falls on him. StuRat (talk) 17:28, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

scully was pretty — Preceding unsigned comment added by There goes the internet (talk • contribs) 07:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article on Christianity

The article on Christianity has been translated into many languages, however it does not currently contain a translation in the language Lingua Franca Nova (LFN). LFN has it's own Wiki and there is an article within it on Christianity (link: http://lfn.wikia.com/wiki/Cristianisme). Would you consider adding the LFN version to the Wikipedia article on Christianity? Thanks Guido Crufio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guido Crufio (talk • contribs) 22:41, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We only do language interwiki links within the XXX.wikipedia.org domains (not even Commons gets such links). AnonMoos (talk) 23:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and Wikia are separate organisations. Roger (talk) 16:49, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]