Humanities desk
< June 8	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 10 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities 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.

June 9

Is Jack Ruby unique?

I know of only one case where

person A was murdered/assassinated
person B was arrested for that murder
while B was in custody and before B could be brought to trial, B was himself murdered by person C
person C was a member of the general public, not any kind of officer, and not himself in custody

That one case, as I indicated, is Jack Ruby's murder of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Has this in fact happened on other known occasions, or is it possible that the Ruby/Oswald case is unique in history? --142.112.221.43 (talk) 05:14, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of lynching victims in the United States contains several cases, such as the 1858 lynching of Thompson and Despano. If awaiting a retrial after a failed trial counts, see also the 1891 New Orleans lynchings. --Lambiam 09:55, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This story from CNN documents a similar case from India in 2021: [1]. --Amble (talk) 17:03, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe Hollywood movies and TV westerns, the Old West was replete with such cases. 136.54.99.98 (talk) 19:28, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, folks. Now let me add one more requirement: person A must have been famous/important enough that the first murder was called an "assassination". Now have there been any other examples? --142.112.221.43 (talk) 06:29, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I had never heard of Sheriff McHargue before, but apparently he was locally famous enough that his murder was called an "assassination" by the press, and the alleged assassins were lynched the next day while in county jail.^[2] --Lambiam 09:34, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well found. Thanks again. --142.112.221.43 (talk) 17:57, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

“Miss Otis Regrets” …DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 12:30, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Classifying Dunkin' Donuts

Wikipedia's American fast food restaurant template classifies it as a beverage place, but this article:

Visualizing America’s Most Popular Fast Food Chains (visualcapitalist.com)

still classifies it as a doughnut place regardless of what it now is. Do people disagree about restaurant categories?? Georgia guy (talk) 17:57, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The name contains both. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:18, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

People disagree about any categories. --Lambiam 09:35, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's wild. When I visited Dunkin' in the early 1990s, it was definitely categorized as a doughnut place, but it's entirely possible that it is much more than that now in the 2020s, and is indeed a beverage place. Things change over time. Viriditas (talk) 09:53, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Outer Manchuria

Over the past few months, I have been coming back again and again to Outer Manchuria. I've concluded that the sense of Outer Manchuria referring specifically to Outer Manchuria as the territories ceded by China to Russia in 1858 and 1860 is a Wikipedia citogenesis from 2004. That is to say: "Outer Manchuria" (referring to the ceded territories) was made up on Wikipedia in 2004. (1) Is that true? Please explain any opinion. (2) There's no second question. I'd just like to have a direct and clear confirmation or disconfirmation on that first question, or, barring that, a clear "maybe". (3) Please go check out and build up the Wikipedia and Wiktionary entries for Outer Manchuria, which I've done work on. I'm coming here because I can't believe what I seem to have discovered, and I'm hoping you will put me in my place. Thanks! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 20:40, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It may be a calque of French Mandchourie extérieure or German äußere Mandschurei, both of which can be found earlier.^[3][4] I have not checked, though, to what extent the areas referred to by these uses coincide with the ceded territory. --Lambiam 06:30, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

La Mandchourie intérieure avait été sous influence russe jusqu'à la victoire japonaise dans la guerre russo-japonaise (1904/05) qui a amené la région sous influence japonaise. En 1906, le Japon a posé le chemin de fer de Mandchourie du Sud à Port Arthur (Japon: Ryojun). Le chaos qui a suivi la Révolution russe de 1917 a permis au Japon d'étendre temporairement son contrôle à la Mandchourie extérieure, mais la région est revenue sous contrôle soviétique en 1925. La Mandchourie intérieure est passée sous le contrôle du seigneur de guerre chinois Zhang Zuolin pendant la période du seigneur de guerre en Chine.

(Jennifer Guirado 2019 Colonialisme et son Histoire)

L'empire colonial [japonais] comprenait ... et enfin l'espace mandchourien -- en réalité la Mandchourie du Sud puisque la Mandchourie extérieure (au-delà des fleuves Ousseuri et Amour) avait été annexée par la Russie en 1858-1860.

(Pierre Brocheux 2012 Les décolonisations au XXe siècle)

Google translate handles them well. — kwami (talk) 08:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These are post-2004. This one is from 1931: "Nun beschränken sich seine imperialistischen Ziele zunächst auf die Mongolei, die äußere Mandschurei und Ostturkestan."^[5] (Google Books only allows one to see the first four words), in which "seine" refers to "das Reich Stalin’s". --Lambiam 09:17, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They should be enough to demonstrate that the definition corresponds though. — kwami (talk) 09:20, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwamikagami and Lambiam: Hey, thank you two for looking into this. Kwamikagami, the question is whether this word was made up in 2004 or not, that's the question I want answered. The side question of internet-age usage of the neologism is totally different. My point is that between 1860 and 2004 (144 years), no one called this area Outer Manchuria. Once we figure out the answer to that, then the implications of that fact will flow from it naturally. Just focus right on that specific question. I think it was only the anonymous British IP who created the article that ever called the area Outer Manchuria, and then it's all been citogenesis from there. I will check out all of Kwamikagami's stuff later, but I just want to say that I did a "sniff check" on Lambiam's German sentence from 1931: "Nun beschränken sich seine imperialistischen Ziele zunächst auf die Mongolei, die äußere Mandschurei und Ostturkestan.". Google Translate gives: "Now his imperialist goals are initially limited to Mongolia, outer Manchuria and East Turkestan." Think about it like this Lambiam: in 1931, did Stalin have imperialist goals in controlling Vladivostok? Hell no he didn't: Vladivostok was not an imperial goal, it was a foregone conclusion that it was part of the USSR. He had goals in areas that weren't part of the USSR. In that text, I would tell you that äußere Mandschurei refers to the fringes of the Manchuria inside China that was not part of the USSR, that is, the parts near the Chinese Eastern Railway. Check out my work at Wiktionary:Citations:Outer_Manchuria#outer_Manchuria_(remote_region). I think that this German cite would fit snuggly into that pattern, if I'm understanding the source correctly. (This was just a cursory glance not a full analysis.) Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:29, 10 June 2023 (UTC) (Modified)[reply]

I am impressed and surprised. You seem to have made a very solid case with your citations. I also looked up the Chinese equivalents 外滿洲 and 外東北 on Google, but again can't find anything pre-2004 that uses that to mean the areas ceded in 1858 and 1860. (Though I suppose I could have missed something.)

Nonetheless, I have to ask: so what if it is citogenesis from there? If it was a recent citogenesis, sure, but the citogenesis has been going on for almost two decades. By now the term is, as you've demonstrated with citations, quite securely attested with this new meaning in post-2004 academic sources, and Chinese websites have very much picked it up. That seems to be enough to hang an article on: whatever it used to mean before 2004, "outer Manchuria" now very much means "the areas ceded in 1858 and 1860".

P.S. There's also the similar term "Outer Northwest" (the areas ceded at the 1864 Treaty of Tarbagatai). Double sharp (talk) 15:43, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the phrase means what it means, regardless of whether the current meaning got started on WP. (And do we really expect French and German sources to pick up on what someone invented for WP-en? Though my German's not good enough to evaluate those uses. I'll stick to the French.) But the reader would need to be careful not to read the current meaning into older sources. — kwami (talk) 19:35, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some further evidence that these were not normal phrases in Chinese pre-2004:

This 1999 RFA article mentioning the lands lost in the late Qing and beyond: it uses 外蒙古 "Outer Mongolia", and mentions the cessions of 1858, 1860, and 1864, but does not use the terms 外滿洲, 外東北, 外西北 for those lands.
Another old Chinese article, I guess (based on the URL) from 2004, about the unequal treaties: despite mentioning the cessions of 1858 and 1860, the lands in question are never called 外滿洲 or 外東北.

Double sharp (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The WP-ja article was translated from WP-en and WP-zh. I'm not familiar with Japanese sources anyway, but if they exist, apparently the WP-ja article wasn't based on them. — kwami (talk) 21:01, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found a French sources from 1911 that speaks of "Mandchourie extérieur et intérieur", so evidently the distinction had some meaning, but they don't define what it was. — kwami (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"S'appuyant sur le fait que la proclamation du protectorat russe sur la Mandchourie Extérieure menaçait de rouvrir la question chinoise, il demande la création de deux nouvelles divisions destinées à tenir garnison en Corée, création qui devait, paraît-il, ètre suivie dans quelques années, de celle de quatre autres divisions."

"Relying on the fact that the proclamation of the Russian protectorate over Outer Manchuria threatened to reopen the Chinese question, he demanded the creation of two new divisions intended to garrison Korea, a creation which was, it seems, to be followed in a few years, with that of four other divisions."

[quotes in original] This was reg. the "Crisis of Dec. 1912 to Feb. 1913."

-- Antoine Rous de La Mazelière 1913 Le Japon: histoire et civilisation, vol. 6

— kwami (talk) 21:14, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your efforts! I'm becoming more and more confident that this is citogenesis.
@Double sharp:: I don't want to discuss anything else in this particular discussion thread except precisely whether or not this sense of this word was created on Wikipedia in 2004. Once that determination is made, then there can be a fuller exploration of "what should be done". (My guess is that it would definitely have some kind of effect, but I'm not really sure what that would look like, because this is the first citogenesis I've ever discovered personally.)
@Kwamikagami:: Just eyeballing this: when you read "Russian protectorate over Outer Manchuria", what does that mean to you? Russian "protectorate" over Vladivostok? Or Russian protectorate over the area around the China Eastern Railway area? What makes more sense in context? Vladivostok was not a protectorate of Russia, it is Russia. No one in their right mind would call Vladivostok a protectorate. But the term 'protectorate' could easily apply to territories outside Russia that Russia excercised control over, like the China Eastern Railway area. Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:32, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That would require a familiarity with the history that I don't have. That's why I was so careful to provide the date they were covering: someone who does know the history could probably make sense of it. — kwami (talk) 10:44, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, regarding the exact question you are asking, I am convinced that the term is unattested in English and Chinese with the meaning "the areas ceded in 1858 and 1860" prior to 2004. The evidence suggests that the term is citogenesis from en.wp, as it only appears on zh.wp from 2005. (It appears on de.wp from 2008 and fr.wp from 2022!)

And yes, I agree that in the cite kwami has given, "outer Manchuria" cannot possibly mean Priamurye. Double sharp (talk) 12:42, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Geographyinitiative, WP doesn't seem to have an appropriate article, but you're aware of "Space and Place", have seen Mark Elliott's "The Limits of Tartary" and all the other terms? zh:中國東北地區 'Northeast' and zh:外東北 'Outer Northeast', Chinese Tartary, 'East Tartary', Russian Manchuria? In Black Dragon River Dominic Ziegler uses 'Outer Tartary', saying synonymous with 'Outer Manchuria' after Nerchinsk (which seem a little off, but maybe). Rather than 'citogenesis' maybe just the impetus to describe a somewhat loose geographic term with a definite boundary and create a map for an article? Means what the author intends it to mean based on context. fiveby(zero) 16:41, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: Nothing in yellow was part of China proper. A migration of Chinese persons from the northernmost Chinese provinces of China proper to outer Manchuria did not per se leave the domain of the Chinese Empire. It just means that Chinese people were moving north, not that they were entering Russian controlled territories.

@Fiveby: You write: "Rather than 'citogenesis' maybe just the impetus to describe a somewhat loose geographic term with a definite boundary and create a map for an article?" What you have described there is precisely a neologism. That, if that's what happened, would be EXACTLY the sort of thing that I'm claiming happened. The IP made this sense up, and then citogenesis bolstered it. (PS: I'm going to start working on 'Russian Manchuria' on Wiktionary to see what that exactly refers to.) Geographyinitiative (talk) 17:11, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the impetus was from a reinterpretation of the names "Inner Mongolia" and "Outer Mongolia". These come from actual Qing administrative divisions, whereas there never was an administrative division under the Qing between "Outer Manchuria" and the rest of Manchuria, and neither was there between the "Outer Northwest" and the rest of Xinjiang. (The areas now called "Outer Manchuria" were just parts of Jilin and Heilongjiang.) But if you only know "Inner Mongolia" and "Outer Mongolia" as names (which is plausible, since "Inner Mongolia" is the name of a Chinese province today), and then look up the modern situation on the map, then you notice that Inner Mongolia is today part of China, whereas Outer Mongolia isn't. So the words "inner" and "outer" must have been reinterpreted as meaning "today still within China" and "today no longer in China" by the IP and by everyone who picked up the term, and then extended to the territories lost to Tsarist Russia in the northeast and northwest. Double sharp (talk) 17:43, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think, tho way out on a limb, that 'inner' and 'outer' in a geographic sense always have some connotation of the part inside and the part outside and not so much near and far. wikt:extra#Latin as in Ptolemy extra Imaon. fiveby(zero) 18:40, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have collected evidence of usage without an implied boundary and of those pushing back against the term using 'so-called' or quoting etc. But treaties create boundaries that can be drawn on a map and that would seem to be pretty natural usage at some times. It's hard to prove a negative. I would hope that serious authors are looking at usage of 'Outer Northeast' by China instead of looking to Wikipedia, so citogenesis seems unlikely. What is undoubtedly true is the irredentist usage is now current. fiveby(zero) 18:16, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let me try to sum up what we know for certain.

Part of Qing China that was historically part of Manchuria was annexed by the Russian Empire in 1858 and officially ceded to Russia in a treaty between China and Russia that was part of the 1860 Convention of Peking. For the purpose of the discussion, let us refer to this ceded territory as "Ceded Manchuria". When the Russian Empire was succeeded by, successively, the Russian Republic, the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, and the Russian Federation, Ceded Manchuria remained part of Russia.

The term "Outer Manchuria" has been used as a name for Ceded Manchuria. The question under discussion here is, when was the term "Outer Manchuria" first used specifically as a name for Ceded Manchuria?

We know that the term was introduced in this specific sense in Wikipedia on 10 May 2004 at 15:54 (UTC). We know that the term was used earlier (elsewhere) in a different sense. So the question before us is, did the (anonymous) editor who introduced the term here coin the term, or had it been used in this specific sense before 10 May 2004? (Note that the same edit also introduced the term "Inner Manchuria".)

To qualify, when used in a historical context after 1858–60, as an attestation of a use of the term "Outer Manchuria" in the specific sense of Ceded Manchuria, it is necessary that the area referred to is in that context part of Russia. There are uses of "outer Manchuria" referring to parts of China after 1860. Evidently, these parts were not ceded to Russia, and are therefore distinct from Ceded Manchuria. It appears that, thus far, the search for earlier attestations than 2004 has come up empty-handed. --Lambiam 05:40, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did we see "Phantom Pains in Manchuria: Dreams, Loss, and Projection" yet? fn# 10 The name Wai Dongbei does not appear to be used by Chinese academics, but it has gained prominence in non-academic sites such as Chinese Wikipedia (http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/外东北) Note Wai Dongbei that is not "Outer Manchuria" but "Outer Northeast" as discussed in the text p. 73. There are other examples such as [6] For China the loss of ‘Outer Manchuria’ (wai dongbei 外东北) in 1860... 外东北 ngram fiveby(zero) 13:11, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Callahan, William A. (2009). "The Cartography of National Humiliation and the Emergence of China's Geobody" (PDF). Public Culture. 21 (1): 141–173. see pages 163-4 beginning Because it is located at the crossroads of various empires, Manchuria exemplifies the cartographic complexity of colliding geobodies. fiveby(zero) 14:05, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These sources date from after 2004 and so have no bearing on the issue. --Lambiam 20:06, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Both are good sources for the article, highlighting the usage of 外东北 Wai Dongbei 'Outer Northeast' mostly on internet forums, which is rendered as 'Outer Manchuria' in English sources. Callahan points to an episode in 2004 where Beijing was harshly criticized on the China Daily’s online forum for the treasonous act of ceding Chinese territory... traced to the Web site of the China Cartographic Press...the Chinese government quickly removed these Web pages. That would have been October, but maybe a spike in interest within China running up to the signing? They don't go toward saying the IP was or wasn't the first to render as 'Outer Manchuria', but at least point to the newness of the concept and internet usage. fiveby(zero) 20:57, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In this (1862 in English by a British naval officer) source, it is very clear that the phrase refers to areas at the time within China. The Chinese are peculiarly averse to leaving their own country, and it is not on the account of the prospect of higher wages that they do so, but because their native districts are overpopulated. This has been exemplified of late by the sudden overflow of the inhabitants of the northern provinces into outer Manchuria.70.67.193.176 (talk) 14:42, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it appears to show the opposite: (1) The Chinese are averse to leaving China. (2) However, they may do so [i.e., leave China] because of overpopulation. (3) A recent example are [Chinese] inhabitants of certain [Chinese] provinces leaving for outer Manchuria. Ergo, in the mind of the writer, leaving for outer Manchuria means leaving China. --Lambiam 20:17, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nonetheless often, on the frontier "outer" has been used meaning merely scarcely populated, or "underdeveloped". --Askedonty (talk) 21:22, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe clearer: had another try for more recent book hits (1993-2003). Only two non-list results on first page, both read like the term means Heilongjiang. All results were snippet view.

Manchuria: An Ethnic History - Juha Janhunen · 1996 · ‎- Found inside – Page 6 - ... allowing , for certain purposes , the two subregions of Southern and Central Manchuria to be viewed as a single complex which may be termed Inner Manchuria , as opposed to the periphery or Outer Manchuria
Feminine Or (un)feminine: Struggles Over the Meanings of ...-Hong Jiang · 2001 · - Found inside – Page 27 - Like many urban youth of her generation , she was sent to a military farm in the Great Northern Wilderness of outer Manchuria to accept education from farmers and soldiers during the Cultural Revolution in 1969. (Wiki article on Nie Gannu says Great Northern Wilderness is in Heilongjiang.)70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:36, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]