Difference between revisions of "2129: 1921 Fact Checker"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
(cleanup)
Line 21: Line 21:
 
In view of the fact that nothing of importance hinges on the truth or falsity of this statement, not much time need be consumed to ascertain whether this is truth or fiction.
 
In view of the fact that nothing of importance hinges on the truth or falsity of this statement, not much time need be consumed to ascertain whether this is truth or fiction.
  
-Kansas City Sun
+
-Kansas City Sun<br>
Friday, May 6th, 1921
+
Friday, May 6<sup>th</sup>, 1921
  
 
[Caption]
 
[Caption]
  
I have a grudging respect for this 1921 newspaper fact-checker
+
I have a grudging respect for this 1921 newspaper fact-checker.
  
 
{{comic discussion}}
 
{{comic discussion}}

Revision as of 15:01, 27 March 2019

1921 Fact Checker
POLITIFACT SAYS: MOSTLY WHATEVER
Title text: POLITIFACT SAYS: MOSTLY WHATEVER

Explanation

Ambox notice.png This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: Created by a NON IMPORTANT SOMETHING. Explain the title text and pilgrims. Add a link if the newspaper is real. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.
If you can address this issue, please edit the page! Thanks.

This comic shows a 1921 newspaper article with information about pilgrims coming to America. Randall has a 'grudging respect' for the author, who feels the information is so unimportant that no fact-checking has been done, and enough integrity that he felt the need to inform the reader this.

The Kansas City Sun was a newspaper than ran from 1908-1924.[1]

Transcript

Ambox notice.png This transcript is incomplete. Please help editing it! Thanks.

[Block of text from a newspaper]

An investigator claims to have discovered in some dusty archives that back in the days when the pilgrims landed each person coming to America from England was required to bring with them eight bushels of corn meal, two bushels of oatmeal, two gallons of vinegar and a gallon each of oil and brandy.

In view of the fact that nothing of importance hinges on the truth or falsity of this statement, not much time need be consumed to ascertain whether this is truth or fiction.

-Kansas City Sun
Friday, May 6th, 1921

[Caption]

I have a grudging respect for this 1921 newspaper fact-checker.


comment.png add a comment! ⋅ comment.png add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ Icons-mini-action refresh blue.gif refresh comments!

Discussion

Two gallons of vinegar, huh?162.158.106.144 14:26, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

While I too respect this fact checker's perspective on what really matters (and what doesn't), it's clear to me that in this fact-obsessed 21st century we cannot let this purported fact go unverified. Get on it, people! ;) PotatoGod (talk) 14:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I fact checked this comic. The text in question is on page 8 of the newspaper, leftmost column, three paragraphs from the bottom. Billtheplatypus (talk) 15:12, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

[citation needed] The LOC link in the explanation says that the Kansas City Sun was a Saturday Weekly, so it wouldn't have been published on Friday, May 6th, 1921 as claimed. Unfortunately, the LOC only has scans of from 1914 through 1920, so it doesn't have scans for 1921. Do you have a source where you fact checked it? Blaisepascal (talk) 15:39, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
This. You can get the OCR if you don't want to sign up. 162.158.155.176 16:08, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Off topic, but oldnewspapers are interesting. Especially the notices and lawsuit notifications, it's interesting to see that the newspaper notifications was considered enough notice that a judgement could be rendered. 172.68.46.215 17:17, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
This is still the case. For certain types of civil actions where the respondent's address is unknown and personal service is otherwise unavailable, notice through newspaper publication is sufficient. Larger cities in the US even have specialist legal newspapers that are primarily funded by payments for publishing these and other public notices.
I think the explanation needs to clarify the dates here. There appear to be two different Kansas City Suns, one in Kansas, the other in Missouri. The Missouri one was a published from 1908-1924 and targeted the black community. The Kansas one was published at least from 1892 to 1924, and possibly longer (digitized issues up to 1924 are available online, which is also about when things start being still under copyright. Coincidence?). This fact check is in the Kansas paper. Blaisepascal (talk) 18:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Wouldn't "whatever" be not worth checking? "Mostly whatever" implies it could be worth checking but beyond current enthusiasm. --141.101.99.41 15:29, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I thought corn travelling back from England to America was the problem... 162.158.90.90 16:02, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

By 1620 there should've been plenty of time to establish some growing of maize in England. I don't know the real truth, but it's plausible. --162.158.214.82 16:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Historically, "corn" was a general term for grain, usually the local grain. It also referred to things which where grain-sized, like the large grains of salt used to make "corned beef" or hard warts on the feet. It was only in North America where the predominant local grain was maize that "corn" came to have the narrower meaning of maize. If there really was a requirement to bring a supply of "cornmeal" in the early 1600's from England to the Americas, I'd expect it to be ground wheat, barleycorn, or rye, not maize. Blaisepascal (talk) 16:47, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
It's there any more information/sources on this? I find this interesting. 172.68.46.215 17:17, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Source: wiktionary, google's dictionary, and presumably any other English dictionary you might prefer. Zmatt (talk) 18:01, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Anyone interested in this kind of things? Well the angel-saxons which came from Germany to England (or Angelland, as it was called , after them). They brought many agricultural (and other) stuff and their german names for it. even though the spelling and/or pronounciation has developed differnetly often, there are still many parallels. Especially to older English. A German female pig is a "Sau", pronounced just as "sow", the german word for grain? "Korn", cow? "Kuh" (pronounced similarily). There are many more examples, but this are the ones coming to my mind instantly. --Lupo (talk) 14:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Is this related to the corn mazes that I see on TV shows? Some kind of pun about maize mazes? I don't live in the US, I don't know a lot about that; I have only seen those in TV shows 162.158.78.58 03:12, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Oh, they really exist. I've encountered them in both New York and Maryland. We use to go to one as a "mandatory fun" day at my former employer. In fact, when I left my old job, my boss asked me if I wanted to stay an extra week to participate in the annual employee event. I asked him, "Does it involve corn?" and when I got a yes, I said no thanks. 162.158.79.191 14:45, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Guys, "corn" is the English word for "grain" or "seeds". When they said corn meal, they meant flour, probably wheat. Maize was called "Indian corn" because it was indian grain. But as settlers grew their own indian corn, they dropped the word "indian" to differentiate it, just calling theirs "corn", which is how our maize ended up with this misnomer. — Kazvorpal (talk) 05:06, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Blaisepascal is arguing that the article (or incomplete template) was, in fact, created by a BOT. Before starting an edit war, can I check the consensus on what we do with the created by? I always use the [relevant item]. That's right, Jacky720 just signed this (talk | contribs) 19:53, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I've seen it both ways, although keeping the BOT part would be less common. It works as is; I wouldn't change it. --172.68.141.148 07:48, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

I was looking at http://mayflowerhistory.com/provision-lists that discusses some lists of items that the pilgrims were to take with them. This sounds related to what was discussed in the text from the newspaper. 14:08, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

In this age of fanatism and factionism of all kinds, Randall could't be more wrong. Ask Swift's Endians. 172.69.54.87 23:13, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Fact check: Mostly False! 162.158.62.67 14:50, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
You'll have to be more specific as to what Randall's wrong about. Regardless, in a practical sense, Randall most certainly *could* be more wrong. As Stuart put it so well in The Big Bang Theory: "It's a little wrong to say a tomato is a vegetable; it's very wrong to say it's a suspension bridge." 172.69.71.18 08:11, 13 April 2019 (UTC)