I would like to make an edit (but I can't because I don't know what the best words are) to the Johnson Ferry article related to a recent change where the road has become dis-continuous just east of Roswell Road (Georgia State Route 9.) Can anyone do this with good wording?? Georgia guy (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Be WP:BOLD. Discontinuous is a perfectly cromulent word, but if someone has a better term then they can edit the article as well. Matt Deres (talk) 12:20, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a source for the discontinuity/interruption/hiatus/separation/gap, it might be helpful in suggesting le mot juste. Readers may also wish to learn more about the cause or reason of this recent disruption, and whether it is envisaged to be temporary or permanent.

Also, how should we interpret this snippet of info dated May 15: Workers remove the “Road Closed” sign on Johnson Ferry at Roswell Road signaling that Johnson Ferry is open to eastbound traffic and traffic can move both directions rather than one way.?  ​‑‑Lambiam 13:43, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am starting to suspect that this image was originally taken by the Indiana Air National Guard on January 27, 1937,[1] which would place it in the public domain. Currently it is housed in the Courier-Journal Photograph Collection at the Ekstrom Library Photographic Archive at the University of Louisville.[2][3] Any way to find out if the Courier-Journal got the aerial photo from the Indiana Air National Guard? I want to upload it as a free image. Viriditas (talk) 22:57, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is mentioned in our article on the 113th Air Support Operations Squadron: "The squadron, or elements thereof, called up to perform the following state duties...flood relief efforts along the Ohio River in southern Indiana during January–February 1937.." The university library attributes aerial photos to the IANG. Can anyone tell if the white lettering and image are reminiscent of government photos from the time? I believe that the federal and state govenments in the 1930s used this technique of applying opaque lettering on the negative for captions. Viriditas (talk) 23:09, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking for references but I can’t find them. EndermanSurfgo (talk) 01:01, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, newspapers.com is a good place to start, as they have many articles on the 1889 fire. But you have less than 500 edits, so you don't qualify for WP:TWL. Saint-Sauveur is known as a historical fire-prone area so this material should be easy to find elsewhere. Google books and internet archive have many public domain books on this subject available that you can use to write your draft. Viriditas (talk) 01:14, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There appear to be a number of articles in Newspapers.com, and you might be able to get a trial subscription to get enough time to scope them out. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:04, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Immense incendie dans Saint-Sauveur, à Québec (in French). The author is a Canadian historian and has a French Wikipedia article - fr:Jean Provencher. Alansplodge (talk) 14:14, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And a very brief mention here: "467 maisons détruites". Alansplodge (talk) 14:17, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And mentions in L'événement, a Quebecoise newpaper (in French) are here. Searching "incendie Saint-Sauveur" on that page brings up more results. Alansplodge (talk) 14:24, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And finally, one in English! Major Charles John Short and Staff-Sergeant George Wallick 1889 Fire Memorial. Alansplodge (talk) 14:26, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

oui, thank you EndermanSurfgo (talk) 18:51, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are cup, teaspoon and tablespoon used in recipes in most metric countries? And do most recipes in the US weigh non-liquid ingredients such as flour and sugar in fluid ounces, like how many countries do this in deciliters? --40bus (talk) 16:29, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the US, flour is generally measured in cups (by volume), though more precise bakers may weigh it (by pounds/ounces or grams. The fluid ounce is a measure of volume, not weight.) Sugar is measured the same way. Both are sometimes measured in tablespoons/teaspoons for smaller quantities (such as when using flour to thicken a sauce). -- Avocado (talk) 00:56, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See Cooking weights and measures. There are defined metric equivalents to such quantities, with for example a metric teaspoon being 5mL and a metric tablespoon 15mL, and anyone who cooks will usually have utensils and containers sized and/or graduated suitably, although many people cook mostly by personal estimations without bothering to make precise measurements or use correctly sized spoons, etc. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-27434-43 (talk) 01:39, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In my (limited) experience, present-day Western European recipes use grams ("g") for larger quantities, also for flour and sugar, which is usually measured by weight, not volume. For liquids, such as oil and milk, litre-based measures (such as "ml" and "cl") are preferred. For smaller quantities, "tablespoon" is a commonly used measure.

Turkey is fully metric, but su bardağı ("water glass", about 200 ml) and çay bardağı ("tea glass", about 125 ml) are often used in recipes.^[4]  ​‑‑Lambiam 08:30, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder what the metric equivalent is for a "pinch". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:36, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Une pincée" in French; even the inventors of the metric system have not bothered translating that term into milliliters. Xuxl (talk) 13:39, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Canada is nominally metric, but faced with the deluge of USian culture that is actively hostile to metric (unless measuring street drugs), teaspoons and tablespoons and so on are widely understood and used. When used in baking, flour shouldn't be measured by volume (metric or not) as it is too easily compacted. For most cooking applications it probably doesn't matter, but it's more than enough to ruin baked goods. Matt Deres (talk) 18:46, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cooking is art. Baking is science. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 22:28, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You fon't weigh things in fluid ounces. A fluid ounce is a unit of volume. Traditionally American cookbooks used only volumes, not weights. I think this is changing, but I'm not sure how common weighing ingredients is in new books or what proportion of the population even has a kitchen scale. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:21, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, teaspoons and tablespoons (and dessert spoons too) feature in recipes, cups are more of an american thing. Most measurements are in metric, but metrication was only half a century ago, so if you have an old cookbook, or an old family recipe, it'll probably use imperial measurements.

Also, I suspect a lot of people get recipes online - which could very well come from the US and use their measurements - so cooks need to be able to figure out what they mean. Chuntuk (talk) 22:53, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A teaspoon is typically 5.0 ml, but in the United States, a teaspoon is 4.9 ml or one-sixth of a fluid ounce. Stanleykswong (talk) 14:06, 24 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt teaspoons reach 2% accuracy. PiusImpavidus (talk) 08:12, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A traditional Turkish teaspoon (çay kaşağı),^[5] a measure commonly used in Turkish recipes,^[6][7][8] is about 1.5 ml (± 10%), usually less than one third of an Anglo-Saxon teaspoon. It is typically used as a unit of measure for ingredients too much of which ruins the dish. Obviously, this discrepancy is not helpful when naively translating recipes cross-culturally. Common teaspoon sizes found in West European kitchens are mostly somewhere in between, but in my experience rarely considerably more than one half of the US teaspoon measure.  ​‑‑Lambiam 11:50, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I wanna add my pinch of cooking knowledge (and throw everyone off a bit) and add that in 1970s and 1980s Polish cookbooks (and in practical cooking that my dear Granny, vintage 1926, used to do), you would be instructed, when preparing dough, to add flour and sugar by the glass (which would be something around 250 ml). --Ouro (blah blah) 17:10, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Outside of North America, cups are rarely used as the primary unit of measurement in cooking. Stanleykswong (talk) 20:41, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

https://i0.wp.com/craphound.com/images/ai-force-feeding.jpg

They're "grotesque plutocratic heads", or so says the alt-text in the source. The drawings look old, but don't belong to the original (which is at Kansas–Nebraska_Act#Debate_in_Senate).  Card Zero  (talk) 11:34, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The full alt attribute in the <img> element in the page source has:

alt="The head and shoulder of a supine bearded man in a chambray shirt. He is tied down with ropes around his shoulders. Four tiny figures with suits and grotesque plutocratic heads are prying his mouth open by yanking at his hair and beard. Once [sic] of the men is shoving an evil robot into his mouth."

You'd expect the "tiny figures with suits and grotesque plutocratic heads" (how are plutocratic heads different from common people's heads?) to be drawn from AI tech bros such as Dario Amodei, Demis Hassabis, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and Sam Altman. ("Five men control AI. Who should control them?"^[9]) The figure at the far right might represent Dario, except that he doesn't wear glasses, and there is a certain likeness of the figure at the far left with Elon, but there is no match for the other two figures. The other figure at the right looks like Nietzsche, but that doesn't make sense in the context.  ​‑‑Lambiam 12:10, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the website (a blog) and it is full of images that look to me like AI regurgitation of turn-of-the-century political cartoons. If it possible that the heads are regurgitated mixes of Lincoln and Taft mixed together or FDR and Teddy mixed together. That alt text could very well be the AI prompt used to generate the image. ~2026-16820-81 (talk) 14:41, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe. I suppose to the author (Cory Doctorow) that would count as being a "centaur" rather than a "reverse centaur" (as specified in the blog post). Still, in context it seems like a strange choice to use the same AI that the blog post is complaining about, especially considering that back in 2021, before such options were available, he was making similar cut-and-paste images. The quality of the cutting and pasting has perhaps suspiciously improved in the intervening years. Possibly he pasted the robot on by hand, but asked an AI to replace the heads with "plutocratic" ones. The risk of the AI then choosing a head that resembles some real figure with unintended significance would then be rather great. I agree that they all look vaguely presidential and we perhaps have, on the left and right, two demilincolns. My bet though is that they're all genuine caricatures extracted from Puck.  Card Zero  (talk) 16:27, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a possibility that the base for this version was some intermediate historical cartoon that was spoofing the original. -- Avocado (talk) 18:11, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On the section of criticism section on the Scholastic page, this reads on this page: [10]

Scholastic has been criticized for inappropriately marketing to children. Also, Scholastic now requires parents to submit children's names with birth dates to place online orders, creating controversy. A significant number of titles carried have strong media tie-ins and are considered relatively short in literary and artistic merit by some critics. Consumer groups have also attacked Scholastic for selling too many toys and video games to children, rather than focusing on just books.

This criticism section got removed on March 9, 2023, [11]. However, could there be an actual reason on why is this considered to be a negative thing for Scholastic to sell "too many toys and video games to children, rather than focusing on just books"? Honestly, I do not understand on how video games, jewelry kits, and toy cars, could be education, despite its not in general. And how could this actually be detrimental to having access to a library? I knew that the fairs are frequently scrutinized over several major points of contention.

Here is this general source for this topic, if anyone needs to seek for: New York Times 2009 ~2026-31563-27 (talk) 19:31, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The NYT link returns a page not found error for me. I'm not sure what you're asking exactly. At one point, Scholastic was almost entirely book-driven. But, like many real and virtual bookstores, they've found that selling non-books can be much more profitable. And, like Hollywood, they've found that content-driven properties (Disney, Marvel, anime) are much more reliable sellers than original and bespoke creations, even from established authors. Groups, like some parents and educators, decry those realities and demand that the materials should be of better quality and more educational. Which is fine, but it's a bit like yelling at your local theatre to stop showing so much Star Wars media and focus more on independent auteurs: both Scholastic and the theatre are for-profit entities that are trying to stay in business. Matt Deres (talk) 19:55, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A source for the fact that there has been this specific criticism, viz. from the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (now named Fairplay), is found here: "Scholastic chided for selling toys in book clubs". The mention of this specific criticism, originally added on February 11, 2009, was already removed on July 8, 2021. Whether the criticism is fair is irrelevant to the question whether it should be mentioned in the article; for that, the basic criterion is notability. If included, however, Scholastic's response ("This [book club] model is 60 years old, and it has to stay relevant to do the work it does. To the extent we put in a few carefully selected non-book items, it's to keep up the interest.") should also be mentioned.  ​‑‑Lambiam 08:37, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If there has been criticism of Scholastic in reliable sources, then it probably deserves a place in the article, regardless of whether we think that criticism justified. But the passage you quoted was properly deleted in my view - full of things that "some critics" have said, without any citations of where they said it. Chuntuk (talk) 08:40, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The passage that was removed included a citation to a reliable source precisely identifying who said what where:

Consumer groups have also attacked Scholastic for selling too many toys and video games to children, rather than focusing on just books.^[32]

---

    32. ^ "Scholastic chided for selling toys in book clubs". msnbc.com. Feb 10, 2009. Retrieved Jun 24, 2020.

 ​‑‑Lambiam 21:15, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What percentage of 2025 EU Motorcycle sales were Electric Motorcycles? (~2026-31443-16 (talk) 11:11, 27 May 2026 (UTC))[reply]

5.3% (including mopeds). According to Google. TIOLI. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-27434-43 (talk) 16:17, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. (~2026-31443-16 (talk) 19:50, 27 May 2026 (UTC))[reply]

I think the European Association of Motorcycle Manufacturers provide the data here in the january-december spreadsheet, though I haven't been able to view it properly.  Card Zero  (talk) 22:48, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

According to data from https://insightev.com/europe-after-a-bad-year-we-have-a-wore-one/, 27,000 new electric motorcycles were sold in the EU market in 2025.

According to the link you provided, new motorcycle registrations in the five largest European markets (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK) reached 1,002,848 units in 2025.

Does this mean that electric motorcycles accounted for a maximum of only 2.7% of all motorcycles sold in the EU market in 2025? Stanleykswong (talk) 12:45, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Historically, the top five countries accounted for about 80% of total sales in Europe. Does this mean the actual figure might only be 2.1%? Have I overlooked something or made a mistake that I'm not aware of? Stanleykswong (talk) 12:48, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The UK isn't part of the EU, remember.

And the 5.3% mentioned above is reported to include mopeds. I suppose the line between mopeds and motorcycles is quite clear (riding a motorcycle requires a specific driving license). On the other (light) end, the line between mopeds and electric vehicles that aren't really regulated or may not even be allowed on public roads all over the EU (pedelecs, e-scooters, segways etc.) is rather vague, so it's unclear which of those electric devices are included to come to that 5.3%. Rules vary by country and change often. PiusImpavidus (talk) 13:40, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, riding a moped requires a moped driver's license (Category AM). A moped driver's license can be obtained either as a standalone moped licence or come with a full Category B car driver's license. However, no driver's license is required to ride an electric bicycle (with a power of no more than 250 watts) or an electric scooter (in most EU countries except Poland and Switzerland). As for the Segway, the situation is more complex. In some countries, such as the Netherlands, Segways are strictly prohibited on public sidewalks and bike lanes in most cases. In other countries, such as Spain and France, while there is no nationwide ban on Segways, local regulations (such as those in Barcelona) may prohibit their use. Stanleykswong (talk) 20:59, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For the record: in the Netherlands, electric stand-up scooters are illegal on public roads. E-bikes not only have a limit of 250 watts, but also of 25 km/h. Any faster than that and they are mopeds, requiring driving license, number plate, helmet and banning them from bikepaths. The rules are sometimes ignored.

Actually, it's a mess. Many people (in particular real cyclists) are very annoyed by all those new electric vehicles that pretend to be similar to bikes but behave more like mopeds and are believed to be pretty bad for traffic safety. Legislators can't keep up with the technological changes. Attempts at regulation may be framed as attempts to block innovation and it's claimed that it's good when people switch from cars to these electric things, but it seems that most riders of these electric things switched from regular bicycles, which are getting pretty rare away from the larger cities.

PiusImpavidus (talk) 22:33, 31 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently been trying to add citations for things on wikipedia but cant find any records or stuff online i can use. Is there a way to easily get sources or have i just been stumbling onto information that doesnt have a source? Dibosaurus (talk) 14:29, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I use Google Books a lot. A trick for searching is to use "speech marks" for pertinent words or phrases, which often avoids red herrings. Google Scholar is useful for science subjects. Also archive.org - you can open a free account to see books that are still in copyright. Ditto JSTOR. Our you can ask us. Alansplodge (talk) 14:47, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There's also Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sources. I think in practice I've only turned to that list for inspiration about twice, ever - and that's not even its intended purpose - but it might put you in the general picture about what shapes sources can take.  Card Zero  (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo. Where is this photo? I don't mean where it was taken, i mean what place is it supposed to represent. https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Favril-lavigne-2002-v0-5zv87vypslac1.jpeg%3Fwidth%3D640%26crop%3Dsmart%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D2cf9c4146138749503784f1dfd4733eec5365b49 ~2026-22534-68 (talk) 00:00, 30 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is one photo from a photoshoot of seven photos by professional photographer William Ciccocioppo, taken the year when Lavigne's debut album, Let Go, was released (so before she was replaced 😜). I don't know who commissioned the photo shoot, but this was plausibly Arista Records as part of the promotion of the album, and the setting may have been chosen to fit in with her then skate punk persona, not further representing any specific place in particular.  ​‑‑Lambiam 07:03, 30 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]