Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:34, 7 October 2017

Welcome to the entertainment section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/E

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

October 1

Film ratings and distributors

I'm looking for the websites of respective film classification boards in Luxembourg, Malta and Vietnam where I can find ratings and local distributor of certain theatrical film. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 03:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For Luxembourg that doesn't seem to exist. http://www.luxembourg.public.lu/fr/actualites/2010/07/05-CSCF/index.html (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 17:57, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Same in Malta. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:44, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Film at 11

"This is a later interpretation of the idiom, as news broadcasts were not counted in ratings during the time 16mm film was used in newsgathering and hence promotions typically took the form of "newsflashes" or "special reports" which simply conveyed the facts of the story." — What exactly do "ratings" and "newsgathering" refer to? I can't really make head or tail of this statement.--Tuchiel (talk) 19:37, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Ratings" means Nielsen ratings. "Newsgathering" just means the process of preparing a news report, such as learning the facts and filming the events.

That's a rather poor article you're linking to. I'm tagging it for NPOV. --69.159.60.147 (talk) 21:07, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much.--Tuchiel (talk) 17:22, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Actually, the whole sentence still does not really make sense to me: "and hence promotions typically took the form of "newsflashes" or "special reports" which simply conveyed the facts of the story." — Don't modern news reports convey the facts of the story, too? And what does "hence" refer to here – I mean why should the newsflash thing be an argument for the purported fact that news broadcasts did not count in ratings? Sorry if I'm blockheaded. Best--Tuchiel (talk) 17:34, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is all in reference to broadcast news, as opposed to on-demand news. Broadcast news is commonly delivered as a teaser and then, later, the story. A ridiculous example might be something like starting out as 6:03pm with "There are three things you probably have in your kitchen that are likely to kill you in the next month! Stay tuned in to find out what they are." Technically, they are delivering content, but only just enough to get you to listen to other stuff while you wait for the real story. This does not have to be limited to a single broadcast. Assume that a station has news at 6 and 11 (very common). The 6pm news show would want to let people know about the triple-murder that took place that afternoon, but they would also want you to tune in at 11pm to get more news. So, they would make a promise that there would be more information at 11 (the whole "film at 11" trope). So, in a nutshell, the 6pm news does a teaser, the team does "newsgathering" to prepare a better product that will be on "film at 11." 209.149.113.5 (talk) 14:30, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 3

Why shouldn't somebody who constantly misspells things be allowed to edit Wikipedia articles ?

Hi how can i eddit an article with out another bloger Erased That thing that I just added — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickyjampr78732156 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your username hasn't added anything to articles that was removed by other editors. You have removed useful information (here and here) that was reverted . Vandalism is usually reverted quickly, either by editors or bots. — 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:E19A:1892:B4DC:8315 (talk) 21:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to tell why the OP posted on this page, but given the user ID, likely to be short-lived at Wikipedia. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to tell why certain editors pick seemingly random pages to vandalize in a seemingly random way. 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:E19A:1892:B4DC:8315 (talk) 00:39, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I added an appropriate title (I counted at least 8 errors in your one sentence question, and we can add failing to place a title, on top, to that list as well). Seriously, you need to study English in school before attempting to edit Wikipedia again. We don't expect edits to be perfect, but we do expect them to be a lot better than this. If Spanish is your native language, then perhaps you can write better in Spanish, and thus should contribute to Spanish Wikipedia instead. StuRat (talk) 00:43, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above account has been indeffed as a sock. To the OP, the simple answer is WP:Competence. Wikipedia is a collaborative project and editors aren't required to be perfect. But if we are spending more time cleaning up after you than we gain from your edit, then you are a net negative. As a volunteer project if editors are a net negative and this doesn't seem sufficiently likely to change, these editors are generally unwelcome. We don't always agree who is a net negative or how much chance someone should be given to improve. But there is general consensus that eventually, even if an editor acting in WP:Good faith; if their edits are so bad because of a lack of knowledge, understanding of what the standards for wikipedia articles, or simply atrocious English there comes a time when it's simply not worth keeping them around any more in the hope things will improve enough that they are no longer a net negative. I'd particularly note that anyone who thinks they are so important to the project such that they WP:Sock to be able to edit after blocks (or whatever the reason why they sock), is even more likely to be seen as a net negative. Nil Einne (talk) 07:21, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 4

How come in sports like basketball, a single player can make the difference in success, but not in football?

I've noticed that it's common in certain sports, particularly basketball, for a single player to make the difference between championship contenders and being cellar teams. Theoretically, a bad team one year could become a playoff contender or even a championship contender with the addition of one or two good players. Conversely, the departure or injury of even one key player could ruin a team's chances. By contrast, in other sports (like football), while one player could make some difference, success or struggles seem to stem more from overall factors as opposed to a single player. For example, in the case of Leicester's 2016-17 struggles, while N'Golo Kante's departure from the team was cited to be the biggest cause, there were also other factors that affected the team's situation; meaning Kante's departure was not the sole reason. By contrast, in the 2012 NBA playoffs, Derrick Rose's injury was pretty much enough for the Bulls to be defeated in the first round, despite having the 1st seed. Why is this the case? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:30, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that kind of football. Perhaps the level of play in soccer is so high that players' skill levels in top leagues are closer together (Leicester is/recently was Premier League right?) Also, 1 player is 1/5th of the basketball starters, 1/11th of the soccer. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:44, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Every sport is different. You might have the greatest pitcher in the history of the world, someone who wins every game - but he's only going to get a fraction of the wins a ball team needs to qualify for the post-season. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:33, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In basketball, every player is involved in nearly every play, whereas that doesn't seem to be the case in football (and baseball). Clarityfiend (talk) 05:39, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because in Basketball, a player on the floor is 1/5th responsible for his team's success, where as in football he's 1/11th. 1/5 is a larger number than 1/11. Math is hard.--Jayron 32 11:23, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's a factor but not the only one. In basketball a ball possession usually ends with a shot with a good chance of scoring, even if some of the team is mediocre. A star player can take a large part of the shots. In football you need a team to set up scoring chances. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:22, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One issue is the pace of the game. In basketball, scores happen continuously. The goal is score at a faster rate than the opponent. You can't stop them from scoring. You just try to slow them down. This is caused by the shot clock. Once your team has the ball, they must attempt to score in 24 seconds. The fast pace means that in basketball the ball moves quickly from player to player. No single player gets to dominate the ball. In football (soccer), the pace is completely different. Scores of 0-0 are common. A score of 1-0 or 0-1 is expected. A score of 3-0 is a blowout. With the pace being so slow, a single player can dominate the ball. If you added a shot clock to football that required the offense to attempt a goal in 24 seconds, the pace would increase and players would share the ball more. In football (gridiron), it is a completely different game. Only a few players ever touch the ball, but those who rarely touch the ball (such as the linemen) are the ones most involved in every play. If you have a bad offensive guard, it weakens your line and you can't run the ball to the weak side or protect he quarterback to try a good pass. Every play becomes a panic to escape the weak side of the line. Any weakness is easily exploited and drastically limits what may be done. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 18:03, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at it in the most general terms, some sports rely more on teamwork, and others don't. For example, a relay race relies on every member of the team, while with some other "team sports", they just take the top individual score or two, and in this case the scores of the rest of the team don't matter at all. StuRat (talk) 18:47, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Toon Boom Animation's removed filmography sections

Hi. The Films, TV Series, Music Videos and Video Games sections on Toon Boom Animation were removed in August for being unsourced. Can anyone here please find sources for the titles? Thanks! 178.22.170.123 (talk) 04:54, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What's stopping YOU from doing it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:09, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Too much research, plus the page is locked. 5.167.49.12 (talk) 05:11, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So if you're too lazy to do the research, why should anyone here be bothered with it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:30, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Being bitey doesn't improve Wikipedia; perhaps the OP looking for references noticed that this is purportedly a Reference desk.

—2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 05:13, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel like doing the OP's work, go ahead. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:49, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's rather the point of this page, editors volunteer to find references. Alansplodge (talk) 16:49, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Who dressed the best?

PopCrush had an online voting poll. It was to determine who it the Best Dressed Queen of 2017. Camila Cabello and Ariana Grande made it to the Finals. The voting closed the other day. But PopCrush didn't reveal the results. Who won the Best Dressed Queen of 2017?2604:2000:7113:9D00:E489:B375:36EB:1AC5 (talk) 11:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The 3rd "final" round of voting ended Monday, October 2 at 11:59 p.m. EST: [1] -- you still need to wait for the final results to be published. 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 14:45, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

With a contest title like that, I'd expect entries from RuPaul, etc. StuRat (talk) 14:48, 4 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

In the meantime, be sure to visit the site often ...and click on the ads! ;) — 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 15:55, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And once again,shameful overlooking of Elizabeth II here... Lemon martini (talk) 23:39, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a foul?

[2] Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:47, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To paraphrase the old adage: "your right to swing your basketball ends where my nose begins". It looks like he just missed his nose. 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 20:42, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware of ANY basketball Personal foul that does not require physical contact. There is no contact made in that video, thus no foul. There is the possibility of a technical foul, but I can assure you there's nothing there that qualifies as a technical foul. --Jayron 32 21:21, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So it seems it's not (I don't know the rules to the last letter) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:31, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you look carefully, it looks to me like part of his hand and part of the ball go behind the defender's head. So I think the perspective is messing you up, and he didn't do this right into the guy's face, but off to the side. It just looks like a close call. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:05, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia: Fact or fiction

Loudwire has a series of videos on Youtube entitled 'Wikipedia: Fact or fiction'. Here is an example with two members of Stone Sour: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7S5XgqC-6Q What do you think about editing wikipedia articles on the basis oftheir content? Munci (talk) 20:44, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questions asking for opinions should not be answered in this venue. --Jayron 32 21:35, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where should it be asked then? Munci (talk) 06:37, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Village pump. Alansplodge (talk) 10:17, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Or Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:38, October 6, 2017 (UTC)

The Sound of Music: Documentary

Walker, Christopher (29 December 2012). "Climbed Every Mountain: The Story Behind the Sound of Music".
Vint, Rob (18 March 2015). "The Untold Story of the Sound of Music".

Not sure, but the 1st one is probably about the actual Von Trapp family whereas the 2nd is about the film.

—2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 21:15, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are "anniversary editions", with up to 5 disks, (according to your link above): "The Sound of Music 50th Anniversary Ultimate Collector's Edition—a five-disc set featuring thirteen hours of bonus features, including a new documentary..."

Also, read the 'Additional Features' section on this 2-disk edition (on Amazon). — 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 03:00, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 7

prophetic dreams in Sandman

Is there any prophetic dream (a dream predicting future events) in The Sandman or any of the spinoffs? Thanks in advance. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:02, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Carrero, how about Johanna's dream while she´s rescuing (the head of) Orpheus? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:36, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whats the original music?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a098ReqIdtk, heard it somewhere else as classical, what's the name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Money is tight (talk • contribs) 13:29, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As per the comments underneath the video itself from over 5 years ago, it appears to be based on Zadok the Priest. Nanonic (talk) 14:15, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely Zadok; what have they done to him? Alansplodge (talk) 16:43, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 99: / Line 99: @@
 == The Sound of Music: Documentary ==
-Is there a documentary about the film [[The Sound of Music (film)|The Sound of Music]]? [[Special:Contributions/5.80.99.45|5.80.99.45]] ([[User talk:5.80.99.45|talk]]) 20:49, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 :*{{cite web|last1=Walker|first1=Christopher|title=Climbed Every Mountain: The Story Behind the Sound of Music|url=http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2732432/|date=29 December 2012}}
 :*{{cite web|last1=Vint|first1=Rob|title=The Untold Story of the Sound of Music|url=http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4538402/|date=18 March 2015}}
 :Not sure, but the 1st one is probably about the actual Von Trapp family whereas the 2nd is about the film.
 :—[[Special:Contributions/2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50|2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50]] ([[User talk:2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50|talk]]) 21:15, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
-Are any of these documentaries featured on the DVD? [[Special:Contributions/5.80.99.45|5.80.99.45]] ([[User talk:5.80.99.45|talk]]) 19:48, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 :There are "anniversary editions", with up to 5 disks, (according to your link above):  "''The Sound of Music 50th Anniversary Ultimate Collector's Edition—a five-disc set featuring thirteen hours of bonus features, including a new documentary...''"
 :Also, read the 'Additional Features' section on this 2-disk edition [https://www.amazon.com/Sound-Music-Two-Disc-Collectors/dp/B00009V7OI (on Amazon).] — [[Special:Contributions/2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50|2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50]] ([[User talk:2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50|talk]]) 03:00, 6 October 2017 (UTC)