Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Wikipedia Reference Desk covering the topic of entertainment.

Welcome to the entertainment reference desk.
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

  • Provide a short header that gives the general topic of the question.
  • Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Post your question to only one desk.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. All answers will be provided here.
  • Specific questions, that are likely to produce reliable sources, will tend to get clearer answers.
  • 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.



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.
 
Choose a topic:
 
See also:
Help desk
Village pump
Help manual

May 16[edit]

“Drag kid” term origins[edit]

Hi! I’ve been working on the Desmond is Amazing article and sources state how he says he invented the term “Drag kid”. I’d like to use it in the article but as he’s a little kid he also could be mistaken. Can anyone find a good source for where the term comes from? Gleeanon409 (talk) 07:53, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Not answering the question. Matt Deres (talk) 12:22, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Celebrating the sexualizing of kids??? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:31, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
What are you talking about? --Jayron32 10:40, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Read it, and try not to retch. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:45, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
You mean your comments? Nil Einne (talk) 16:12, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
I mean the sexualizing of kids can make a normal person retch. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:21, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, the acceptance of the LGBTQ community makes me retch too.... Please don't use Wiki as a platform for your transphobia. Now can mod please deal with this hatespeech? Fgf10 (talk) 08:08, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
What hate speech? Little girls being put into beauty pageants is equally nauseating, for the same reason. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:14, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Please don’t be pervy. Gleeanon409 (talk) 13:21, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
I wouldn't use the term "drag kid" in that sense. Novice drag performers often have mentors that they refer to as "drag mother"/"drag mom" or "drag father"/"drag dad" and the experienced performer will refer to those they help and advise as "drag children" or "drag kids". I would just refer to him as a "kid who does drag" or a "young drag queen". --Khajidha (talk) 12:59, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
I appreciate this feedback, however in looking to verify, I can see “drag daughter” is commonly used, same for “drag children”. But both “drag kid” and “kinderdrag” appear to be nearly exclusively used with Desmond is Amazing and not before he used these terms as self-descriptors. I’m looking to verify the origins of either or both terms. Gleeanon409 (talk) 03:22, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately, "drag kid" in the sense I am aware of is the sort of thing that doesn't get written down in reliable sources. I know many queens who speak of their "drag kids", but can't cite anything for you. --Khajidha (talk) 14:17, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Wait, wait, WAIT!! https://www.styleweekly.com/richmond/queen-mothers/Content?oid=2088832 First example needs a little extrapolation: "A drag mother takes care of her kids like any mother." Second example is exact: "She's also reared five drag kids of her own." --Khajidha (talk) 14:34, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
And here's a usage from 2010: https://www.washingtonblade.com/2010/06/17/queery-richard-legg/
I have no doubt that Desmond coined the usage for a very young drag performer, but "drag kid" has been used basically as long as "drag children" or "drag daughter". Much like the difference between the base words "children" and "kids", "drag kid(s)" is more likely to be spoken while "drag child(ren)" is more likely to show up in print. --Khajidha (talk) 15:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! I was sure there was something somewhere but I kept striking out. Gleeanon409 (talk) 19:15, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
You really have to dig deep to find it, though. Not surprising as it is "ingroup" slang. And the group has historically been very much underground. The current mainstream interest in drag is very different from the historical treatment of drag. (There's reasons that many of the first incidents in the gay rights movement had drag queens at the center of things.) It's kind of like researching carny talk.--Khajidha (talk) 19:21, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

May 18[edit]

Eeeh-ooh[edit]

In the ongoing ice hockey world championship, in intermissions you can hear someone yell 'eeeh-ooh' or similar, and the audience answers with the same yell. I have heard this at many other events too and I think the yell is from the 1970s or even older. What is the origin of this and when was it made so popular it is almost generally recognised, as it is now? /Dangerous Dancing (talk) 13:33, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

You mean something like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzLl8MPuKwI --Khajidha (talk) 15:53, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
American baseball fans will often yell "Day-O!" as a ninth-inning rally cry (the first two notes from "Day-O (The Banana Boat Song)"). It's the same two musical notes, and similar yell-and-response, as Freddie Mercury's version. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:12, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, it's the same as the yell by Freddie Mercury at Live Aid. What does "day-oh" mean, then? / Dangerous Dancing (talk) 19:32, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
In the original song, it meant that it was sunrise and hence it was time for the nightshift to go home. In baseball, it means that the team has a chance to win, and [if they do], the crowd can go home. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:52, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. / Dangerous Dancing (talk) 20:12, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
In Freddie Mercury's example, it was simply playing the crowd. Demonstrating that he was a master showman by making them do what he wanted. It also draws the crowd into the experience. --Khajidha (talk) 17:26, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Kind of like Cab Calloway drawing them in while scat-singing during "Minnie the Moocher" - until it gets too complex and he leaves them in the dust. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

May 19[edit]

Super Bowl LVIII[edit]

If CBS is Going to Air Super Bowl LV. Then NBC Will air Super Bowl LVI. Then in the next three years in the new NFL TV Contracts CBS will likely air Super Bowl LVIII Three years later If I'm right Because NBC can't air 2 Super Bowls in 3 Years. 68.103.78.155 (talk) 01:55, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

You've left Fox out of your post. As mentioned here List of Super Bowl broadcasters the broadcast rights rotate between those three networks. I have not read of any changes but that could always happen I suppose. MarnetteD|Talk 02:25, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
At one time, ABC/ESPN was in the mix. Although not included in the current rotation, a new contract could change that.    → Michael J    19:15, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Start times for Australian Football[edit]

Next week, the nine matches played in the AFL's Round 10 will start at 13.45, 14.10, 16.35, 19.25, 19.25, 13.10, 15.20 and 15.20. Why do the matches never start on the hour, or the half-hour? xiij ~talk~ 19:53, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

(OR) It often comes down to broadcast scheduling. Sometimes the time at the END of the match is more important than the start. e.g. For the "The News at Nine" to happen at 21h00, the game must be over. Since the average game is about 2.5 hours it must start before 18h30. Add a 5 minute fudge factor = 18h25 start time. 196.213.35.147 (talk) 07:55, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

19th-century minor league baseball[edit]

I just discovered Category:Binghamton Crickets players and Category:Binghamton Cricket players. Neither team has an article. When the same name (or a very similar name) is used by two teams in the same city with non-overlapping time periods, how do we decide whether or not the second one is a revival of the first? (Note that the "Crickets" category embraces 1887, 1888, and 1900.) I trust that things were a bit informal in the 1880s and 1900s compared with today, and there wouldn't be some league office with decision-making powers on this question, comparable to what the National Football League did regarding the Cleveland Browns. Nyttend (talk) 20:17, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Are you referring to Pop Smith? The sourcing says he's the same guy.[1] But you're right, things can get kind of slippery in the 19th century, and for minor leagues especially. Note the scarcity of info on the 1877 Binghamton players.[2] I can't think of any examples now, but I know that when they were building the encyclopedias of major league ballplayers in the 1950s and 1960s, they occasionally ran across guys who were somehow listed separately but were actually the same guy - and possibly the reverse situation as well, especially for a common name such as Smith. And by the way, the 1877 Binghamton team is consistently referred to in area newspapers as the "Crickets", plural. Hard to tell where Baseball-Reference got the information that it was singular "Cricket". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:11, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
No, I didn't notice that one individual was in both. Instead, I came close to proposing a merger of these two categories, thinking that they were the same team, before I noticed that there was a significant time gap between the two. This led me to wonder why they're considered separate teams, given the same city and name. (And yes, singular does seem odd; aside from Stanford, a "so-and-so attribute" name, e.g. "Miami Heat", seems really recent.) I discovered them in the first place in Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/GreenC bot 13, where they were causing problems for a bot that was changing links in biographies based on whether the article mentioned the word "baseball" or the word "cricket". Nyttend (talk) 00:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
They are probably (though not guaranteed) separate entities, and I recommend disambiguating them somehow. That should take care of the "Cricket" vs. "cricket" problem. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
The situation is even worse than you think. The Binghamton Crickets category says that the team played in the International Association in 1887, Central League in 1888 and New York State League in 1900. The International Association article says that the Crickets joined in 1878 (which the categories show for the singular Cricket team). The New York State League article does not list the Crickets as a member team, but shows the Binghamton Bingoes in that capacity. --Khajidha (talk) 11:55, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
And an additional oddity: the Binghamton Bingoes (a team from 1900) are wikilinked to the Binghamton Triplets (which lists no history before 1923). --Khajidha (talk) 11:59, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Triplets referring to Binghamton / Johnson City / Endicott NY. Bingoes alliterative with the city name. No clue about Crickets at this point. One problem is that team nicknames were generally unofficial in the 19th century. They were usually dreamed up by the writers, albeit sometimes with the approval of the teams. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:16, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
The 1877 team wore uniforms that said "Cricket",[3] while the papers called them "the Crickets". This might not be a mistake, it could be a reflection of the style of the day. For example, a team like Chicago would have had "Chicago" on their shirts, while the papers often would have called them "the Chicagos". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
More to the point, there's a Sep 2, 1877 article in the Chicago Tribune which says Auburn has joined the League Alliance, and later they are referred to as the Auburns. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:59, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
As a better example, on Aug 13, 1877 the Boston Globe shows the League Alliance standings as: Indianapolis, St. Pauls, Janesvilles, Milwaukees, Lowells, Minneapolis, Memphis, Stars, Athletics, Crickets, Fairbanks, Fall Rivers and Chelseas. Cities with names ending in "s" they didn't try to pluralize. (I got this info via Newspapers.com, a pay site.) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:08, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Note that the International Association of 1878 picked up the Binghamton Crickets from the defunct League Alliance. And again they're using the plural for most or all of the teams, such as the Buffalos and the Rochesters. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:16, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
After 1878, the next reference to Binghamton Crickets comes in 1885, in the New York State League. There was also an 1886 club, though it was not mentioned after May, so it could be the league failed. There is also not much coverage in 1887. Your original question is whether there's a connection between these various clubs other than their names. It's possible, but the coverage is too sparse to know with any certainty. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:35, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

[unindent] I guess the core problem is definition: when we have two non-consecutive periods of time in which a team of a certain name plays in a certain place, how do we decide if the team has been revived or whether it's a separate team? The Durham Bulls appear to be treated as a revival, as the article goes back to 1902, but apparently the organization history is that of the Myrtle Beach Pelicans, who have existed continuously since 1902 and moved out of Durham when the new Bulls were created. Conversely, Category:Baseball teams in Washington, D.C. has three subcategory trees for Washington Nationals teams and four for Washington Senators, and the Twins and the Rangers are two of those trees, so one is not considered the other's continuation. What's the difference? Nyttend (talk) 00:07, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

It's not see easy to find a true connection unless local newspapers and/or historians comment on it. But teams will try to link themselves to the past. An obvious recent example, fully approved by the NFL, is assigning the Cleveland Browns' history to the expansion team, when factually it belongs to the Baltimore Ravens. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:14, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Seems to me that the idea that players take the team records with them when they leave a city is just as much a matter of convention as the idea that a city keeps a team's records when the players move to another location. If the entire playing, coaching, and office staff of a team quit or died tomorrow, the records would remain in that city. How is that any more continuous than the Browns example? --Khajidha (talk) 18:36, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
A ball club is a business entity. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:08, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
And the business entities in question decided that the records would be left in Cleveland. So what's your problem? --Khajidha (talk) 22:20, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
The expansion Washington Senators of 1961 were (temporarily) assigned the history of their predecessors, who had become the Minnesota Twins. That assignment isn't factually accurate, it's just marketing hype. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:50, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
If the business entity says that these records go here, that is a fact. A fact based on said business. What you are arguing for is actually based on who played the game, that is not the "business entity". --Khajidha (talk) 00:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
This seems to be getting off the track, but I'll let the OP decide that. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Baseball Bugs and Khajidha, would you mind coming to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 May 22#Binghamton Crickets and participating? Thank you. Nyttend (talk) 23:39, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

May 20[edit]

chalk-marking thingie for sports field/pitch[edit]

Does Wikipedia have an article on this thing? Some models are called "line stripers" on google, but that redirects to Road surface marking which is paint-on-asphault. Some call them field chalk markers or dry line markers, but I can't seem to find anything on that, either. The article is The Tempestry Project which refers to an artist using one of these things in her work, but I had no idea what the source meant when it said she drew with a "chalk marker" until I found her website and a photo and went 'OHHH'. At any rate, I'd love to wikilink for other ignorant people if I could just find the article, if we have one. --valereee (talk) 13:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

In the UK they're known as "line marking machines". Unfortunately on Wikipedia, that just redirects to "road surface marking", which is unhelpful. I don't think that we have an article, although someone will no doubt be along to point out my error. Mikenorton (talk) 16:54, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
With all the mainly-sports-interest-editors out there, I'm surprised there isn't at least a stub already lol! Maybe it's because to them this is DUH! territory --valereee (talk) 17:38, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Googling the subject yields "baseball field foul line dry marker" or some subset of those terms. There doesn't seem to be one predominant term. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:47, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Google results are dependent on the googler's location and past history. As another UK user, googling 'line marker' gives me mostly 'line marker(s) / marking machine(ry)' with occasional additions of words including 'sports' and/or 'field', as well of course as 'paint', 'liquid', 'spray' and 'dry line'. This seems to corroborate my personal experience (as a sports/athletics player and later as a facilities maintenance administrator) that, in the UK at any rate, 'Line marker' is the common and usual term. Unfortunately that title has already been employed for something completely different, so disambiguation will be needed. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.2.132 (talk) 00:31, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Similar results on a search here in Canada. If there is to be a new article, I suggest naming it line marker (sports) and renaming the existing line marker to line marker (diving). --76.69.46.228 (talk) 02:26, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
I guess I'll create a stub, just to have something we can put a photo on. Thanks, all! ETA ugh, but notability...how on earth do I prove that lol? --valereee (talk) 12:07, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Does appearing in lots of online advertisements demonstrate notability? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Baseball Bugs, unlikely to, I'd think? I'm thinking there might have been coverage around the time it was invented, maybe? Or maybe something along the lines of a book on the history of sports field development? --valereee (talk) 14:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
This may be helpful, and check out page 40 of the same book for a little on the history of their use. Mikenorton (talk) 14:18, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Oh, thanks, mikenorton! --valereee (talk) 14:39, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
I've created Draft:Line marker (sports), would love some input from people who have some expertise in sports, as I have none --valereee (talk) 17:00, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
For another reference, see p. 5 of this publication relative to the maintenance of baseball fields [4]. The contraption is called a line marker and there is an illustration. Xuxl (talk) 19:01, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Xuxl, thank you! I'm hoping that'll be the third reliable source to prove notability! --valereee (talk) 19:20, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Don't exclude the marking of colored lines on a white surface, for hockey or curling. --76.69.46.228 (talk) 20:16, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
76.69.46.228, would love to include, do you have anything to source it? --valereee (talk) 20:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

May 21[edit]

John Wick 3 Plot Clarification[edit]

In John Wick 3, Sofia goes to see Berrada with 2 dogs. One is shot and shown laying on the ground. She leaves with 2 dogs. I saw nothing to explain what happened and it is nearly impossible to Google because anything that contains both Wick and Dog brings up unrelated topics. Was there a third hidden dog? Was the dog shot in a bullet-proof vest and, for some unknown reason, decided to lay still instead of acting like an injured dog? Is it a zombie dog? I assume that they shot the scenes of them leaving (with both dogs) before shooting the confrontation where the dog was shot. Instead of editing out the second dog, they just assumed nobody in the audience would realize that 2-1=1 and accept that 2-1=2. 12.207.168.3 (talk) 17:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

If it wasn't in the movie, then you'll need to find a forum that speculates on such things - and this ain't it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:08, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Agreed, though I will say that, given the character, it's unlikely that the subject of a dog being killed would be something that got left unresolved or forgotten. It was a major feature of the first film and has been widely used in memes and jokes ever since. Matt Deres (talk) 12:38, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

May 22[edit]

Soviet Chainsaw[edit]

Hi All. Please would someone be able to tell what is happening in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwLZUeaIR38

between 20:24 and 20:27 he appears to apply a liquid and and an electric current to the item. What for? What is the aim of this and what is the desired outcome? What is the liquid applied. Unfortunately I can't watch this with volume and suspect it may be in Russian anyway. Any help would be great. Thanks all Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 14:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

At 20:57 if you turn on cc, the subtitle says "orthophosphoric acid + zinc battery case". --TrogWoolley (talk) 14:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
To what end?
That is a very cheap way to do zinc electroplating. He turned phosphoric acid and zinc into zinc phosphate (and hydrogen, which bubbled away). The zinc phosphate solution is applied to the blade using electricity to get the zinc ions to stick. I assume it works fine, but I haven't seen anything that uses zinc in zinc plating for a long time. Chromium is used in just about everything that I know of, but it is still called zinc plating to differentiate between plating and going full chrome. 12.207.168.3 (talk) 15:56, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Star Trek[edit]

I saw part of a Star Trek episode on TV last night and wonder what series it was from. The main things I noticed was that the crew members wore purple uniforms and the captain (or maybe one of the crew) looked sort of like Tim Allen, and the ship itself was like a more bulbous version of the TOS and TNG Enterprises. I've seen some of TOS, TNG, and DS9 but there are more that I've only slightly heard of, so thanks. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 20:11, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

After some clicking I think it may have been Voyager, but I didn't notice Captain Janeway on the screen in the bit that I saw. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 20:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Maybe it was Tim Allen and what you saw was not Star Trek but Galaxy Quest? --Wrongfilter (talk) 20:20, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Hmm, I just looked at a youtube clip of Galaxy Quest and it's sort of possible. That would explain Tim Allen. But I found the purple uniforms on the TV show to be "colorful" as it were, and the YT clip wasn't like that. Oh well, if it's on again I'll try to notice. I saw less than a minute of the show and wondered what it was. Thanks. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 20:33, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
The Orville has more colorful uniforms and a captain that faintly resembles a 40ish Tim Allen. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 20:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Wow, I hadn't heard of that show but again I found a youtube clip. It might be that. I remember thinking the thing I saw had to be ST because the ship resembled the TNG Enterprise so distinctly (though it was blobbier). I couldn't quickly find clear shots of the Orville but it imitated ST in so many other ways that it might have done the same with the ship. Thanks. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 21:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
The starship Orville on the series of the same name has a distinctive body shape with loops at the rear. I presume this shape was chosen precisely because it was not a design commonly seen on Star Trek. I don't actually remember what the starship Protector in Galaxy Quest looks like, although I've seen it multiple times, because it's not seen much from the outside in the movie; but this is what it looks like according to a fan website, which I assume is correct. I like the guess that it was actually Galaxy Quest. As to uniform colors, here's a shot from the movie with four of the principal cast members (L-R: Sigourney Weaver, Alan Rickman, Tim Allen, Tony Shalhoub). --76.69.46.228 (talk) 22:27, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Hmm, I don't remember about the loops but the engine nacelle looks Treklike enough that it's possible that it was the Orville that I saw. I also remember there was an alien or two aboard the ship, whose getup was around halfway between the TNG "nose bump" aliens and Babylon 5 full-on prosthetics, so I figured it was a post-B5 Star Trek. Although, TNG had Ferengi. It could still have been Galazy Quest I guess too. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 22:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
I think the only alien-looking character (loosely speaking) in the main crew in Galaxy Quest is the one played by Alan Rickman; see my link above. (More precisely, he's played by the character played by Rickman). Alien species on board The Orville include Maclins and a Xelayan. Does that mean it's The Orville after all? --76.69.46.228 (talk) 23:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Say, do you have access to TV listings from last night that would enable you to just look it up? --76.69.46.228 (talk) 23:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

I was thinking about that and the answer is I don't know. I'm not much of a TV watcher these days. There's listings on xfinity.com but that site doesn't like the browser I'm using. If it was a rerun it might be on every night, so I could just check if it's on tonight. Those aliens might be the ones I saw, so the Orville theory sounds promising, but I can't be sure without seeing it again. I'm glad to find out about it even though I don't feel likely to become a regular viewer. I'm surprised and amused that they got away with making such a show. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 01:22, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Oh, we are being silly, just focusing on what things look like. What can you say about the story in the bit that you saw? Can you remember any dialogue? --76.69.46.228 (talk) 09:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

May 23[edit]