Humanities desk
< May 19	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 21 >

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.

May 20[edit]

Slovenia influence on U.S.?[edit]

Several years ago a trabvl agency in mass. Featured a tour of slovenia and mentioned, in their brochure,that thomas jefferson was inspired by it's history when he was composing the united states' declaration of independance.. I do not recall the name of the agency but when i phoned them back then, about the veracity of the claim about slovenia,they affirmed that it was true and that it went back many centuries ; also highlighted was referance to a coronation hundreds ago years ago in slovenia ;it made special mention of a throne of stone upon which their rulers were crowned...

Now i cannot find the article nor remember the agency...can you illuminate the way ??

Also i heard that the word slave comes from "slav" because they and other slavs were survile to the vickings centuries ago .got any info on that subject?

Joe horvath

(email address removed) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.65.154 (talk) 03:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you Google "Jefferson Slovenia", you'll find lots of stuff about this, such as this page from the U.S. State Department. The story is that Jefferson was influenced by Jean Bodin who relates a legend about how the common people in Carinthia, or Slovenia, collectively agreed to be ruled by a certain duke. This page quotes a book which says the relevant passages had been marked out in Jefferson's own copy of Bodin. I see no reason why this shouldn't be true. As for your other question: yes, that is roughly the origin of the word "slave", except it was not exactly Vikings. As the Oxford English Dictionary puts it, the name "Slav" came to mean "slave", "the Slavonic population in parts of central Europe having been reduced to a servile condition by conquest".--Rallette (talk) 06:13, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Declaration_of_Independence#Influences contains what Wikipedia has; for influences of historical events of European history, the Act of Abjuration and the memory of the Glorious Revolution are more often mentioned... AnonMoos (talk) 06:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Answering the second part of your question first, regarding the folk etymology of the word "Slav". If you read Slavic_peoples#Ethnonym you'll see that indeed the word "slav" resembeled the latin word for "slave", so the two terms got confused. However, the actual source of the term "Slav" in the Slav's own language means merely "people who speak". The English word for "Slave" derives from the Latin and Greek words meaning the exact same thing; however the connection to the name of the Slavic people comes from a misunderstanding. A very old misunderstanding, but a misunderstanding nonetheless. Regarding the Slovenian people specifically, it is possible that Jefferson was familiar with the so-called "Slovenian enlightenment" led by Sigmund Zois, Jefferson was quite well read, and looking through the Zois article, it looks like he shared many of the same philosophies that Jefferson shared. So it would not be outside of the realm of possibility that Jefferson knew of Zois and of his ideas; but I don't know that Zois or other Slovenian intellectuals influenced the Declaration of Independence or Jefferson's philosophy in any significant way. Knowing of someone (and we have no proof, as yet, that he even did, just that they were contemporaries who shared a common philosophy) and being influenced by them are two different things. --Jayron32 06:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't agree about the folk etymology. Although I would agree that's what our article suggests. From what I know, sclavus meant both Slavs and slaves from an original meaning of just Slavs. Although the development may have occurred in the Greek sklabos. That seems to be what most scholars say anyway.--JGGardiner (talk) 07:49, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's no folk etymology going on. See [1]. Sclavus is the Medieval Latin word for slave (the Classical word was servus), and it does indeed come from the Slavs' name for themselves. (Since Greek and Latin words never began with sl- at the time, they put a [k] sound in between to make it easier to pronounce.) Pais (talk) 13:47, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aside: The word ciao derives more or less from the formal sono vostro schiavo, "I am your slave", along the lines of the old closing for a letter "y'r obedient servant". Schiavo is pronounced SKYAHvoh, not SHYvoh as in Terry Schiavo. The transformation of a stop followed by [l] to a stop followed by [j] is a reasonably regular one. --Trovatore (talk) 22:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Joe, just a quick word about netiquette: Please don't write in all caps. It makes it harder to read and comes across as shouting. Astronaut (talk) 06:48, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Slovenian user here. I had heard this story before, but it seems to me to be apocryphal at best. Maybe there is a kernel of truth in it, maybe not. The coronations mentioned were coronations of dukes in old Carantania (which some people here believe was a direct ancestor of present day Slovenia, far-fetched as that may sound), the thrones either the Duke's chair or the Prince's stone (I forget which at the moment), and the story, as someone mentioned above is about how Jefferson read of the ceremony in a book and got some inspiration for the Declaration of Independence from the vows the dukes-elect took on coronation day. It all seems a bit far fetched to me, but it is a convenient nation building myth, so there is a number of people here in Slovenia who sincerely believe it. Jayron also explained what I was going to say about the origin of the name Slav. (And just an unsolicited bonus, in case you didn't research this yourself: judging from your interest in this I take it your ancestors were Slovene, and judging from your surname, there is a high probability they were from Prekmurje). TomorrowTime (talk) 07:39, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This book says the story is a myth, Transition and the Politics of History Education in Southeast Europe, p. 65—the Jefferson story mentioned in the footnote as an example of the main text (on pp. 64-65) description of how following the Slovanian election of 2004 the new government pushed for a shift in history education in a nationalistic direction. Apparently the minister of education wanted the Jefferson story taught more extensively in schools, even though "academic historiography had already defined [the story] as mythical." I have no idea whether this book is correct or not—I never heard of this story until just now. Just found it with a quick search through Google Books. From what I could gleam quickly from this and other books, it seems that the theory of Jefferson being influenced by Bodin's writing about Carantania is based on little more than Jefferson having "marked" this page in his copy of Bodin. It appears Jefferson didn't write anything in particular, just made a mark. If that is all that is behind the theory, it is rather flimsy. But again, I only did a quick search so may have missed something more significant. Pfly (talk) 08:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, that's pretty much it, AFAIK. As I said, it's a nice nation building myth, but probably no more than that. TomorrowTime (talk) 08:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

online books[edit]

So, if I have written some books and one of them I think, I would like to provide this one for free online, for anyone to come along and read, (and perhaps occasionally provide some feedback on what is wrong with it) where might I go to do that. I assume there are popular and respected sites that allow such things, though I have no idea where, or what would be best for me. Only thing I can think of right now is going to the site where my blog is, starting a new blog and posting each chapter as a new post on there. But, has anyone got any better suggestions?

148.197.121.205 (talk) 08:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibooks? Llamabr (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, if the books are textbooks. It depends a lot on what kind of book you've written. See Category:Ebook suppliers for some other possibilities; maybe you can find one there that suits your needs. Pais (talk) 14:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This thread from just a few days ago discusses putting your book up on Apple's online bookstore for download on iPhones and iPads. It's possible to put it on the Kindle bookstore, too; here is the link. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:58, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Wall Street Journal[edit]

Financial Times is generally Keynesian. What economic model is promoted by WSJ? Are they supply sider, Austrian or advocate of Chicago school? --Reference Desker (talk) 10:21, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have no citation for this, but they're consistently in favor of tax cuts for the wealthy, so their editorial board has given the thumbs-up to the flat income tax and supply-side in general over time. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Wall Street Journal's editorial pages are particularly associated with supply-side economics. They generally are also advocates of monetarist/Chicago school views, and they often speak of Keynesian economics with disdain. The news pages are written more neutrally. John M Baker (talk) 20:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Loans to unsuccessful factions[edit]

During the Spanish Civil War, both sides borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars (in 1930s prices); whilst the Republicans funded the majority of this with the nation's gold reserves, the Nationalists had no such fund. If they'd lost, what would the creditors have got? What about annexed nations? Has the winning country taken on the debt of the losing, just as an international good grace? What about the lending country seizing assets of the borrowing, has this happened? Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 10:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Usually those who financially back the losing side in a war lose their money. It's a risk you take to dabble in politics. Blueboar (talk) 11:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Supporting Blueboar's point: After the American Civil War, the US Constitution was amended to include: But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States (...) but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extradite between US states[edit]

Are all extraditions granted? Quest09 (talk) 11:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All US states extradite... but not all requests for extradition are granted. It depends on the circumstances. Blueboar (talk) 12:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some seem automatic, though, such as kidnapping, according to our article here. Llamabr (talk) 13:49, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Every state will honor every other states' request for extradition for felonies, per federal law. There are no "safe-havens." Extradition law in the United States#Interstate extradition states: The Extradition of Fugitives Clause in the Constitution requires States, upon demand of another State, to deliver a fugitive from justice who has committed a "treason, felony or other crime" to the State from which the fugitive has fled. 18 U.S.C. § 3182 sets the process by which an executive of a state, district or territory of the United States must arrest and turn over a fugitive from another state, district or territory."

However, each state decides whether or not to pursue extradition, as it's often a costly process. I know that generally, Ohio will not bother to extradite for a misdemeanor, whereas Pennsylvania often does. ^Avic _ennasis @ 14:41, 16 Iyar 5771 / 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Article 4 Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution explains extradition, although it doesn't use that term, but rather it describes it.[2] It's of some interest that the second part of it, cannily worded, had to do with returning slaves to their owners, which of course was made obsolete by the amendment abolishing slavery. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Penny Schools" in the United Kingdom[edit]

Hi all. I am looking to find out a bit of info about Penny Schools, which (from what I can gather) seem to have existed in a few places in the UK in the 18th and 19th centuries. I will soon be writing an article about a place of worship which occupies a former Penny School, so I want to include a brief couple of sentences about what they were, which authorities were responsible for them etc., for context. There's surprisingly little info online, so if anybody has any suggestions for "history of education"-type books, primers etc. I can research in, I would be very grateful! (I visit libraries at least once a week.) Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't heard the term before, but it may be referring to the Dame schools which were private enterprises, often run by older women with no other income. A good account of an early 19th century dame school here (NB for "rude drawings" read "rudimentary drawings"!). This page suggests "Fees were about 3d. a week" so 1d (a penny) a day might not be too far off the mark. Alansplodge (talk) 17:37, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Me again. This page suggests that "penny schools" were the same as Ragged schools, with parents contributing a penny a week if they were able (I couldn't find any other reference to support this though). These schools were usually run by the Church of England, but also by other denominations, charitable trusts or by concerned individuals. This page has more details. Alansplodge (talk) 18:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. I've just found a reference (in the Victoria County History of Sussex) stating that the former school was founded by a Mrs Welch and was run by Dissenters at first, which suggests a Dame School. The links you provided are helpful as well. ("4 times 9 is 30" ... hmm!) Odd how the terminology seems to differ in different places: all three of my sources which specify the type of school call it a Penny School, but I've never encountered the term in relation to any other Sussex schools. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 21:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is this it? Alansplodge (talk) 22:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that's the one. Became a Friends Meeting House in 1965 apparently. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 22:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thirty pieces of silver[edit]

How much would the 30 pieces of silver paid to Judas be worth in 2011 money? How might it compare with the average annual income at the time? Thanks 92.29.112.23 (talk) 13:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Googling "how much judas 30 pieces silver worth" yielded all sorts of results. Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 13:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to our article Denarius (liberally sprinkled with "citation needed" templates), the denarius (the "penny" of the Bible) was worth about US$20, and 1 denarius was a typical day's wages. So, about $600 and about 1/12, to answer your questions. Tevildo (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought he was supposed to have been paid in Shekels though. So, if, as the article suggests, A Denarius contains 50 grains of silver, around 3.25g, and a Shekel is almost pure silver of 14g, that would suggest a value closer to $2500. And then he went and threw it all away, as though that could change anything. 148.197.121.205 (talk) 08:36, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in the article Measuring economic worth over time. It is impossible to determine how much 30 pieces of silver were worth to Judas in today's money. The literary figure of Judas, as a labouring Jew in country occupied by Romans, previously probably not in receipt of wages in the modern sense, and a wandering mendicant at that, is difficult to equate to any economic position in today's society. Additionally, we would need to know the value of 30 pieces of silver as "wages" or as "capital" or as living standards in Roman Judea. To know this we'd need the Judean and Roman Gross Domestic Products, and a way to determine the cash value of capital and living standards in Judea for "average" workers. Your best measure for a comparison, is to compare 30 pieces of silver at the time with the prices of slaves (both a capital good and labour) and land (a capital good relating to living standards) and a nominal consumption bundle of food, clothes, housing, and social/cultural habits for a year for the locals (both Jewish and Roman). Fifelfoo (talk) 01:56, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What time will I be raptured?[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Hello. I'm worried about the end of the world, which is meant to be tomorrow afternoon, according your your article on the 2011 end times prediction. In particular, I have a kayaking trip tomorrow that I don't want to miss, so I want to be sure I've got the bulk of it done before I run out of time. Your article suggests that rapture will occur at 6PM, and that it will sweep across the globe according to daylight savings time zones. But I'll be paddling down the Mississippi River, which separates Eastern and Western time. Which time should I prepare for? Should I paddle closer to the shore of Georgia to try to squeeze another hour out? Also, should I post this to the Science Reference Desk, since matters of cosmology perhaps are better situated there? Thank you. Llamabr (talk) 13:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is the right desk; predictions made by one man based upon religious texts are certainly not science (and questions should not be posted to two desks at once). The way you phrase your question makes it seem as though you either scorn the prediction entirely, or take it very literally, down to expecting rapture to wait for an hour at arbitrary time-zone lines. Perhaps you can get better answers if you clarify your question. Also note that we don't have a crystal ball. SemanticMantis (talk) 14:08, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It also seems you have no idea of U.S. geography. The Mississippi River doesn't divide any time zones; it's Central Time on both sides. And Georgia doesn't have a shore on the Mississippi; it's two states (and one time zone) farther east. Pais (talk) 14:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is fairly obviously a 'joke'. ╟─Treasury Tag►directorate─╢ 14:14, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The conventional Christian view (which I understand to be Bible-based, though I can't say which specific verses) is that not only does no man know when the end of the world will come, even Jesus does not know. Only God knows. Assuming He's even decided yet. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:37, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The International Date Line is presumably at UTC+12, so when it gets to be 6 PM there on the 21st, it should be 6 AM in the UTC time zone. Hence we should know the answer less than 16 hours from now. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:45, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not humour joke threads. It's not constructive. ╟─Treasury Tag►condominium─╢ 14:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I'm not altogether convinced that it doesn't have at least a grain of seriousness, and the fact we have an article on it suggests that certainly someone considers it notable. It may not be notable, after tomorrow. But we'll see. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Llamabr: Only 3% of the world's population is going to be raptured tomorrow so odds are that your kayaking trip won't be interrupted. However, be careful of all the zombies. Fortunately, the CDC has issued guidelines for what to do tomorrow.[3] A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 19:07, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Old street in Belfast[edit]

Resolved

I bought a picture taken in Belfast around the turn of the 20th century. It says Castle Place on it and shows central Belfast with a lot of large shops. Would anyone happen to know where exactly Castle Place is and whether or not it still exists? I cannot recall ever having come upon that street name when I was there. Thank you.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Google Maps claims to find it, but I can't see the street name there. Unfortunately StreetView doesn't get close enough to check. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:15, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It also shows up if you use the Royal Mail's Postcode Finder. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you remember a department store called Robb's? Picture here. DuncanHill (talk) 14:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Commons has a whole category of pictures here. DuncanHill (talk) 14:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Funny coincidence, I was looking up the recent Northern Ireland elections and their result on the Belfast Telegraph site a couple of days ago. They've digitized the Linen Hall Library's collection of 6,000 picture-postcards of Ireland (including Belfast) from a century ago. That doesn't answer your question directly, but perhaps there are some views that match up with yours and can help you to locate Castle Place. See their page for Belfast —— Shakescene (talk) 14:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Castle Place is part of what Google Maps thinks is Castle Street, to the east of the junction with Royal Avenue. --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:39, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been here! I never knew I was on Castle Place. Thanks everybody! A pity Robb's has been demolished. I went to Donegall Arcade, but it's a poor replacement for an old building like Robb's. I appreciate all your help. The irony is that I was on Castle Place the day I bought the photograph and never realised it!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Psychology questions[edit]

I have found some people changing their profile photo in facebook frequently and some others not changing at all.Is there any psychological interpretation of their behavior?

No. --Jayron32 14:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To be more precise... There is always a psychological interpretation for anything and everything, but most are not accepted by experts in the field or justified by valid experiments. In this case, there is no accepted or justified psychological interpretation. -- kainaw ™ 14:59, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To be even more precise, in all likelihood no one has ever performed an experiment to test any hypothesis regarding the psychological motivations of changing one's profile photo. Pais (talk) 15:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Answering a slightly different question, this sparks a memory of a radio programme (probably on BBC Radio 4) that I heard a year or so ago about some research that had been done into the kind of photos that people use in profiles, and how these affected other people's opinions of them, but I can't remember much more. I think it was related to a competition for amateur researchers. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 16:08, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Found it! - see the posting about "Nina and Bernie". AndrewWTaylor (talk) 16:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your best bet would be to look for studies about people who move their furniture around frequently vs. those who get it set the way they like it and leave it as-is for the next few decades. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Historical French Flags?[edit]

What flag would France have used between 1690-1700? --CGPGrey (talk) 17:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Our article Flag of France claims that ~~it was the image to the right.~~ Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The image you have shown is the flag of New France ie French North America. The French flag from the middle ages onwards was known as La Bannière de France (The Banner of France) - three gold Fleurs-de-Lis on a dark blue background. There were minor changes in the style of the Fleurs-de-Lis; I believe this is the correct one for 1700. Alansplodge (talk) 18:47, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More about historical French flags here. Alansplodge (talk) 18:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! New France, got it, sorry. Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Remember though that a banniere is not a drapeau. That was a standard, a war flag, and not the national flag per se. It seems that France did not have a national flag before the tricolore. As the article notes, various flags were used and it appears the closest thing to a national flag is the one to the left of the New France flag in the gallery there. I don't want to add yet another picture here. --JGGardiner (talk) 19:52, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The King's Standard? Dualus (talk) 20:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's the one I meant. Or are you asking me to explain that? --JGGardiner (talk) 21:26, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This painting of the Battle of Cuddalore (1783) shows the French ships carrying a plain white flag as an ensign. There's a joke there somewhere ;-) Alansplodge (talk) 21:49, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Except that it isn't a joke. The white flag was often used at the same time as the blue w/ yellow fleur de lys. Some of the white flags were charged with fleur-de-lys, while at other times they were used as a plain white flag. The whole "France surrenders all the time" is such a tired joke because a) it is overplayed and b) it's so badly wrong that it says much more about the person who repeats it than it does about the French, who simply do not have a history of surrender. The French Navy under Admiral de Tourville was a formidable force under the White Flag, far from surrendering it was known for defeating navies many times larger than itself with superior tactics and fortitude. Back to the OP's question, the other choice for the flag of france was File:Pavillon royal de France.svg which the article Flag of France notes was the royal banner of the Bourbon dynasty as Kings of France, and so was the unofficial flag during the years 1690-1700 as the OP asked. The blue flag with the three yellow fleur-de-lys was the flag of the Valois, IIRC. --Jayron32 22:17, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get my coat... Alansplodge (talk) 23:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Pavillon royal de France (shown to the left) is the flag most often used to represent France in displays of the six flags over Texas. The French colonization of Texas was very brief, lasting only from 1685 to 1689, but the time period is so close to that of the OP's question that I assume the flag would have been well known and widely used in the 1690s, even if it wasn't the one and only French flag. Pais (talk) 22:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The flag that I identified decorates the Kingdom of France article here and in fr.wikipedia. As our caption there notes, "France had no official flag, but as in other autocratic monarchies the monarch's Standard was used as the main flag used to represent France." All of the articles identify the white flag with Fleurs de lys alone as the one used in the presence of the royal family. fr.wikipedia has an article on the flag of the Kingdom of France It identifies the blue flag with the Fleurs de lys as the royal flag preceding the one that I identified. The flag of France article on fr. says the one that I identified was used from the time of Louis XIV without identifying a specific date. His reign was from 1643-1715. So I that my earlier answer was probably correct. --JGGardiner (talk) 23:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

graduate attitudes towards education and honesty[edit]

Some months ago a young American crew member on my boat met some new friends on shore and invited them out to the boat for an evening of drinks and conversation. It was a fun evening of music and lively, animated conversation. Nobody was getting drunk and it was enjoyable, but there was one persistent thread in the conversation that I privately found a little disturbing. They were five people all apparently in their 20s and recent graduates from, I think, 3 different universities. I was the old guy and so made only minimal contributions. Most of the conversation, naturally, centered around their university experiences. The disturbing part was that at no time did I hear any remarks like how satisfied/dissatisfied they were with their education. what value they placed on their education, what they might do with it or what more they might learn. The main thrust was how they had all "cleverly" tricked or manipulated their professors/educators, how they had "cleverly" cheated on all the tests and generally avoided their educational responsibilies, how stupid the educators were and how they had "cleverly" squeeked through to get the appropriate piece of paper. Other than two who knew each other they were all strangers from different universities but with the same basic experiences and attitudes. I'm sure you can understand why I found this a little disturbing. I have no connection or affiliation with any universities, so I have no idea if these random strangers may be representative or typical of today's university products. A little enlightenment might help me to develope an oppinion on that subject. Help?Phalcor (talk) 18:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't hard to understand. Why do you think they needed that piece of paper? They wanted a job that required it. The job doesn't require an education. It requires a degree. So, the education is secondary to the degree. I teach and I understand this well. I tell my students that it is their job to trick me into giving them a passing grade and my job to trick them into getting an education. They laugh, but they agree that it is true. They don't want to learn how to program a computer, but some old guys sat around a sandwich shop and decided that they needed to take one course in programming. So, they do what they can to get the grade without learning and I do what I can to trick them into learning a little bit. Because we are all in agreement, nobody has a problem with it. -- kainaw ™ 18:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you are concerned about the soul of educated America, I can say, don't worry. First off, our universities have had lots of cynical, transactional students ever since we were British colonies. Many of them crash and burn in adult life, but many others become our most creative, entrepreneurial, and industrious citizens. Also, there are still plenty of students who attend university because they love to learn. These people tend to end up working for either non-profits or the government -- which are, incidentally, the two sectors that employ 99% of America's schoolteachers and professors. --M @r ē ino 19:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might find some answers at http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/. (As with websites in general, I do not endorse the quality of English on that website.)

—Wavelength (talk) 19:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My Google search for students cheating statistics reported "About 5,690,000 results", the first being http://www.glass-castle.com/clients/www-nocheating-org/adcouncil/research/cheatingfactsheet.html, which has some statistics on students cheating.

—Wavelength (talk) 21:07, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

12/21 or 12/23?[edit]

Which of these dates completes the 13th b'ak'tun? 12/21 or 12/23? (Neither one is the end of the world, by the way.) 74.72.130.137 (talk) 19:21, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Wikipedia article Baktun, "the current (13th) baktun will end, or be completed, on 13.0.0.0.0 (December 21, 2012 using the GMT correlation)."

—Wavelength (talk) 20:13, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Serious suggestion to the OP. Because the numbers in the heading don't even look like dates to most of the world's population, do try writing the names of the months out if you want a useful response here. HiLo48 (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. :) So, is this supposed to coincide with the Winter Solstice? If so, I would think it would be the 21st. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@ What time should I be raptured[edit]

Forget that. The world's not ending tomorrow, it's scientifically proven. 74.72.130.137 (talk) 19:26, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it does happen as predicted, at 6:00 PM local time in each time zone, it would start at the international date line, which is UTC + 12, or 12 hours ahead of 18:00 UTC. Hence it would start at 06:00 UTC, which is about 10 1/2 hours from now. So we'll see. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:31, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't expect it. Camping apparently believes in the Calvinist doctrine that salvation is unmerited. Our article notes that he estimates a 3% rapture rate. Bugs is right though, 6:00 is the prediction. Probably 6:30 in Newfoundland. --JGGardiner (talk) 19:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia article "2011 end times prediction" has information about that doctrine.

—Wavelength (talk) 20:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Um... does the prediction take into account the fact that much of the world is currently on Daylight saving time? (and what happens in those countries that don't use DST... do they get it at 5 PM?) or is the prediction using Standard Time (which would mean that it will actually occur at 7:00 Daylight Time).

A request to aspiring prophets of doom... give us something we can work with next time... "dawn" or "sun set" are both nice and traditional. Blueboar (talk) 20:34, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If Bugs was a true believer he would know he should be using Jerusalem time. The holy texts says nothing about the International Date Line. Everything including the calculation of Easter uses Jerusalem time.--Aspro (talk) 20:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going strictly by what it says in 2011 end times prediction. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:12, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But that is a Wikipedia article... do you believe everything you read in Wikipedia? I 'KNOW' people who edit it !!! Are you a heathen follower of the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? For if so, I hope you a have your spare set of dentures at the ready, for there will be a great gnashing of teeth.--Aspro (talk) 22:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No,no,no... the Pastafarian rapture isn't scheduled to start until 7:45 PM (open bar) Blueboar (talk) 22:13, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the time given in the article is not accurate, feel free to correct it. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:27, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A credible citation from a reputable source telling us that the Earth and all the people in it have ceased to exist could only be from some other planet. And we, the people who might conceivably have made use of that information had we been alive, will all be dead. I wonder if dead people can edit the Plutonian equivalent of Wikipedia. Seems a reasonable idea. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 00:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the pallid bust of Pallas on the night's Plutonian shore? --Trovatore (talk) 00:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, Jack, tomorrow is just the Rapture. Armageddon proper is on October 21st. 97% of us (at least) will still be here on Sunday. Do try and keep up. :) Incidentally, am I alone in thinking that 3% sounds rather on the high side? According to [4], Christians only make up 33% of the world population, and presumably Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and Anglicans aren't in with a sniff, so that means virtually _all_ the "Protestant" population are in? Naah... Tevildo (talk) 01:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to burst your bubble Jack but tomorrow is not the end of the world but rather the beginning of the end times. Most of us will presumably survive the weekend although internet service may be spotty. The actual end of the world will be in October. --JGGardiner (talk) 01:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sor-REE!!!!! How about I go and cut my throat right now; surely an appropriate fate for one who has failed utterly to give a bone-crunchingly correct answer to a Ref Desk question about the precise UTC time of the end of the world. I used to be a genius - where did I go so appallingly wrong? I know, I'll ask the good folk at the Wikipedia Reference Desk, they'll know. They know everything. Apparently. :) :) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 01:46, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please, dear Jack, don't do anything hasty. Who knows? You might be one of the 3%, and you would look and feel pretty silly mounting throatless to the heavens, trailing streams of brightest crimson. Bielle (talk) 02:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's a vivid image, Bielle. Nice, different, unusual. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 09:12, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What I find startling is that according to both our article and this NPR article, the rapture will apparently progress in discontinuous jumps across the planet by time zone, rather than progressing gradually over the planet as would be the case if it were driven by some natural time measure like apparent solar time. Time zones, or indeed any form of standard time, have only been in existence since 1847, and are a purely human invention that only exist because human legislatures have adopted them. If God is basing the rapture timetable on human-legislated time systems, will it be possible for a legislature to postpone the rapture indefinitely within their jurisdiction, by repeatedly adopting a declaration that the time is at that moment restarting at midnight? Or perhaps if they repeatedly legislatively adopted a date well before May 21, 2011, similar to how the date changed by multiple days legislatively on a country-by-country basis as countries switched from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar? Red Act (talk) 05:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would be easier just to declare that 6 p.m. today will be skipped. If God is a good timekeeper, just slipping in two leap seconds to go directly from 17:59:59 to 18:00:01 should be enough, and barely noticeable by the population. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 06:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, the clocks go forward rather than back, don't they. I can never remember. 18:00 BST has gone, 17:39 UTC now, so clearly they are going on proper time, we still have 21 minutes left, it seems. So, if nothing happens here, I'll let you know. If something does happen, chances are the internet will go out. 148.197.121.205 (talk) 17:41, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The strike of six, again, and still nothing has... what was that? Be right back. 148.197.121.205 (talk) 18:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Australia[edit]

Are there any Australians here? Are you guys hanging in there? Have you seen any zombies yet? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 13:31, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No response? Uh-oh. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 17:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was something like 3:00 AM in Australia when you asked that... even the zombies have to sleep. Blueboar (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be silly, Blueboar. Zombies don't sleep. :) A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 18:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

True... but Zombies don't edit Wikipedia, either (fingers keep breaking off when trying to type). Blueboar (talk) 18:14, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The last day of planet earth, which I suppose is in about 5 billion years, shall hereby be DEFINED as ~~May 21, 2011~~ October 21, 2011 :) thanks to Wavelength for the correction. My math was wrong the first time :) 76.27.175.80 (talk) 19:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article "2011 end times prediction" begins with the following sentence.

The 2011 end times prediction made by American Christian radio host Harold Camping stated that the Rapture would take place on May 21, 2011, and that the end of the world would take place five months later on October 21, 2011.

It seems to me that some people have conflated the "Rapture" (http://www.multilingualbible.com/1_thessalonians/4-17.htm) with "the end of the world" (http://www.multilingualbible.com/2_peter/3-7.htm).

—Wavelength (talk) 16:42, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Nora Univ. faculty and grad student numbers[edit]

Can someone please figure out Princess Nora bint Abdul Rahman University's faculty and enrollment numbers from [5]? I've tried my best with the infobox, but someone who can read the original in Arabic might have a lot better luck. I'm just most interested in numbers for faculty and graduate students, since there are other sources for total student enrollment and (administrative?) staff. What is the "female students" table at the end of that statistics page all about? The whole university is supposed to be women-only. Do they have male grad students? Dualus (talk) 20:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]