Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:39, 8 November 2009

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.

November 2

colm meaney movie

hey guys i think i saw a colm meaney movie where he has sex with a girl in a car, i think it was colm meaney, anyone know what this movie would be the girl had long dark hair i think.--Least0190 (talk) 03:29, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try searching at http://www.imdb.com --Jayron32 04:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Explain What Lady Gaga's Paparazzi Video is About

I understand the first 3 minutes of the Lady Gaga paparazzi video and even the last minute where she kills her "boyfriend" and turns herself in and is vindicated. What is the purpose of the middle three or so minutes with the dead models and the make-out, toching, licking scene on the couch with three punky/glam guys. I don't see any relevamce in these scenes. Can someone please explain.

Confused —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.155.33.242 (talk) 03:55, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does it need a greater relevance than "sexy looking people doing sexy things"? --Jayron32 04:04, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We do have the article...It does make some mention of the video's meaning. Vimescarrot (talk) 13:27, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"We're plastic but we still have fun" is an apparent key line. Beyond the fame/celebrity theme, the video seems to also hint at Princess Diana, Paris Hilton and maybe even Stephen King's Misery. Pepso2 (talk) 14:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One hit wonders

The term "One hit wonder" is usually applied to musical artists. Is there a similar thing in TV series? ie. A producer, writer or actor who came from nowhere, was involved in one very successful TV series (shown on US/Canadian/UK channels), and then who disappeared back into obscurity. Astronaut (talk) 11:07, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't think of an example at the moment but I've heard the phrase used in other fields besides just music. Dismas|^(talk) 11:11, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about The Flash (1990-91)? It's one of the titles on this list of TV's One-Hit Wonders: http://thetvaddict.com/2006/11/04/tvs-one-hit-wonders/ This next one doesn't fit the question, but somewhat related: You're in the Picture was a 1961 game show so bad that Jackie Gleason came on the second week and apologized. Pepso2 (talk) 14:56, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw a clip of that show once. It wasn't really such a bad concept, it's just that the participants (other than Gleason) seemed to have no idea what the concept was. That was kind of the flip side of the one-hit wonder, more like a one-bomb clunker. This is film, not TV, but Michael Cimino comes to mind as a director who made one acclaimed film, then one disaster, and then couldn't buy a job, even if it was bringing coffee to other directors. Among film actors, Harold Russell comes to mind, a guy who won an Academy Award for his only film (except for one he did late in life, I think). That was a special case, though. Then there are the classical composers known for just one thing, such as Pachelbel's Canon, as was discussed here recently; or, to a significant extent, Bizet's opera Carmen. But that's music again. Child actors start coming to mind, like Jon Provost in Lassie or Jay North in Dennis the Menace. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harold Russell won a competitive Oscar and was also awarded an honorary Oscar for the same role, the only such case in Oscar history. -- JackofOz (talk) 06:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the book "Hollywood Economics" gives some statistics which shows that being a WHW is the norm for film directors for example - most of them only ever make one movie. A smaller number make two movies, and directors who make several movies are rare. As far as I recall the statistics indicate that just a purely random process is at play, rather than past experience making future work more likely (except to a small extent for the very rare multi-film directors). I believe the same thing happens with TV. I expect its the same for actors. There are more people willing to do the work than are required, hence on average they have very short careers. I've known two people who have been in mainstream film and tv - and they both had very brief careers, and were disapointed/depressed when their careers faded away, and now do unrelated low-paid mundane jobs. 78.151.90.163 (talk) 13:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a movie, but a book. Harper Lee wrote and published exactly one book, To Kill a Mockingbird. Aside from a smattering of magazine articles, its literally all she ever wrote, but having won the Pulitzer Prize and being one of the most celebrated works of 20th century American literature, its quite a doozy. --Jayron32 22:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's an example of almost literally a one work wonder, in addition to being a one-hit wonder. Compare that with Margaret Mitchell, who did write other stuff, but is really only remembered for Gone With the Wind, hence she qualifies as a one hit wonder. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, one of the big, big names in early science fiction was pretty much a one-work wonder, as far as writing was concerned, anyway: Hugo Gernsback - he wrote just one short but hugely influential novel, but then went on to become the science fiction editor, after whom the Hugo Awards are named. Grutness...wha? 00:14, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jai-alai Definition

To whom it may concern:

I have a question that I hope you will be able to help me with. It involves an addition the definition the Jai-alai.

Jai-alai is not just a pari-mutual wagering. Jai-alai is also a recreational sport that is played on an Amateur Level around the country. Due to the limited amount of Amateur Facilities around the country the sport is unknown to a big part of the population.

Many amateur players have to resort to playing on make shift courts behind shopping malls, or anywhere they can find a sold wall to play on. The only amateur schools or facilities are in Dania Florida, St. Petersburg Florida, and one former Amateur Facility the was built in 1978 and later sold in 2004.

Is there a way to expand the definition of Jai-alai to include the word Amateur in its definition, to give a clear seperation of the Amateur side of the sport from the pari-mutual wagering? More information on Amateur Jai-alai can be found at [1] Please get back to me at your earliest.

Michael Perry —Preceding unsigned comment added by Perryjaialai (talk • contribs) 15:31, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might do better discussing this with other contributors on the Jai Alai talk page. However, from a quick readthrough of the article, I would say that it does acknowledge the amateur side of the sport as well as the parimutuel betting side in the United States, mentioning the amateur facilities that have been built. If you feel the amateur aspect is insufficiently described then by all means go ahead and improve the article, ensuring you cite reliable sources for your contribution. Ka renjc 18:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good point! I see from the Talk page that I complained about this in 2005! Please be bold and contribute to the Jai alai article — anyone can improve any article by clicking "edit this page". Karenjc is correct — the Talk page is the best place to discuss article needs and wants, rather than here, which is a Reference Desk where people ask questions in order to obtain, hopefully, referenced answers. Tempshill (talk) 06:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 3

Channel 7 (AU) horse racing theme

I was watching the horse racing on Channel 7 (Australia) today and used to preview the big race was a piece of classical music I would like to know the name of. They have used this same tune for a couple of years I think. I have googled but found nothing. Cheers, --Commander Keane (talk) 05:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it on youtube anywhere? Or is it a little too obscure? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good idea. I searched for the clip (rather than the song) on youtube but didn't find anything. Channel 7 has videos on its website but they have ads, won't play well for me, and there are too many to check. I checked the "Melbourne Cup Highlights" video but it uses the wrong tune.--Commander Keane (talk) 06:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was it the music that comes in at the finish line in the 3rd video from the top here? If so, I have no idea what it is (how shocking!) , but it's not classical. -- JackofOz (talk) 06:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about that simulated newsreel dealie? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:29, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think JackofOz means the "Melbourne Cup Highlights" video. At the end of that video there is a tune, it is a similar style to the one I am after, but it is not it.--Commander Keane (talk) 06:33, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's the one. -- JackofOz (talk) 06:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I clicked on, but all I'm seeing is that newsreel parody. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless it's documented somewhere (which I'm doubting), it would depend on someone who happened to be watching the telecast at exactly the right time and knowing the answer. I did watch the race, but just the race itself, not the interminable lead up. You may have to ask Channel 7. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:07, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

T206 Honus Wagner baseball card

I was reading this article when I got to this section on "water testing": T206_Honus_Wagner#Failed_water_test. But it doesnt explain what "water testing" means. So whats a "water test" when it relates to cards? What do you do when you water test something? Thanks--SelfQ (talk) 13:15, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, but probably something like what's available on this page: (http://www.cycleback.com/qanda.html) "Fake watermarks can be made by wetting the paper and pressing it with a rubber stamp that contains the design of the watermark in relief. An artificial watermark compresses the fibers instead of separating them as with an authentic watermark. The opacity of this fake watermark will differ from the authentic example. Water will penetrate a genuine watermark faster than the surrounding paper, whereas water on the paper and compressed watermarks will penetrate evenly. There are chemical tests that can also be performed. Obviously, this water test should only be used in exceptional cases, as water can ruin a print. The average collector should not apply water to an expensive or otherwise desirable print." There's another similar example on that page. Seems to be that specific inks or fibers will dissolve/react differently when a bit of water is added. I imagine they'd ahve to do it very carefully, though. zafiroblue05 | Talk 21:51, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Might be more similar to this: "This test basically involves taking a damp edge of a paper towel or cotton tip and wiping the edge or border of the card." Last thing you're going to do is do what you're describing to an Honus Wagner! --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 03:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean it's not to test if one is a witch? Clarityfiend (talk) 07:31, 4 November 2009 (UTC) [reply]

That baseball card turned me into a newt! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC) [reply]

I got better! --Jayron32 22:03, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Were you scared straight? ;D Shaken, not stirred. Ilya Kuryakin ^☭☭☭☭

Family Guy

When do the new episodes come on?Accdude92 (talk to me!) (sign) 14:13, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sundays at 9pm (Eastern/Pacific; 8pm in Central/Mountain) on your local Fox station. The next new episode is this Sunday, 8th November. Xenon54 / talk / 14:40, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Power Rangers: RPM

Is Power Rangers: RPM going to be the last season in the Power Rangers series? David Pro (talk) 19:40, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reason not to believe the referenced information in our Power Rangers: RPM article? Dismas|^(talk) 01:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 4

Mona Lisa Sajol

Does anybody know the name of the eid-ul-fitr 2009 drama or natok that was shown on ATN Bangla and it featured Mona Lisa and Sajol? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.119.32 (talk) 04:34, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you recognize this song? (done)

Hi, Listen here. I haven't got any YouTube account and I don't want to create one for asking. Can you help me out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.183.206.234 (talk) 15:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Janez Detd Anti-Anthem meltBanana 17:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks it is didn't expect that they are from Belgium...ha.--77.183.206.234 (talk) 17:48, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 5

What movie?

What Movie?

What movie was it where a teen's brother is crippled because they played football on the roof. And then he uses the brother's wheelchair to get into baseball game for free. And the brother explains the meaning of the poem about God carrying the footsteps to the teens stoner friend? And the stoner friend says god is one bad mother ff--? --Gary123 (talk) 00:13, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Outside Providence? -- KathrynLybarger (talk) 03:56, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another American football question...

A comment at Talk:1916 Cumberland vs. Georgia Tech football game says, "I *believe* this rule is actually still on the books, but at least at the time, the team scored upon had a choice to kick off or to receive." Any idea whether this really was/is a rule? I don't know where to go to find NCAA or NFL rules. Nyttend (talk) 03:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone had a football question recently, and I and maybe others posted rules histories. I'll see if I can find that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:04, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first place I looked was an official NFL rules book from 2007, which states "after a try [i.e. a point-after-touchdown attempt] the team on defense during the try shall receive." They do not have a choice in the matter, at present, in the NFL. I'll see what else I can find. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the question about substitutions, farther up the page, we have a link for the history of college rules [1] and a link for the history of NFL rules [2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I missed that; I was the asker for the substitutions questions, so I should have seen that. I'm surprised to see this usage of "try"; I would have expected that, if it were used at all today, it would be an alternate name for touchdown, given its relation to the try in Rugby. Nyttend (talk) 04:39, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My first link was about subs, which is not too useful, and the NFL rules history doesn't bring up the subject. I have not found a history of college rules as such, nor even a link for current rules. Someone was saying something in a previous thread to the effect that a touchdown (which equates to a "try" in rugby) used to be fewer points than the "try" in American football. I had never heard that before, and I'm kind of skeptical. Back to the 222-0 game, I did find a Sports Illustrated article that simply parrots the play-by-play, and says Cumberland switched (for awhile) to kicking off after being scored upon, but with no explanation of when or if that approach was no longer allowed. American football was much more of a running and kicking game in those days than it is now, because the forward pass was in its infancy and was considered to be more a desparation play. So teams mostly ran, which meant it took longer to get from one of the field to the other, obviously. To push the other team back, a team might kick on 3rd, 2nd or even 1st down just to get the ball out of their territory. That's what Cumberland tried to do, and obviously it didn't work. Now I'm going to display my ignorance. These articles keep saying Tech never made a first down, because they scored on every set of downs. However, once they had reached 10 yards, wouldn't that count as a first down? It's just that they kept on running, and scored. Maybe that's a rule subtlety that I'm unfamiliar with. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to know about when a certain rule was in place, and what the nature of rule changes in the history of American Football is, David M. Nelson's The Anatomy of a Game is pretty much canonical. Nelson served on the rules committee longer than anyone except Walter Camp himself, and his book is at once comprehensive and an easy read on this subject. If ANY source will cover such a rule from such an old game, Nelson will. --Jayron32 05:34, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you happen to have a copy of that book and/or do you know if it's in print? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

google books does. The last copy I used was about 12 years ago in my college library, and I have not handled a copy since then. Its a bit of a rare book, but still awesome. --Jayron32 06:03, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw. Unfortunately, the appendix with its chronology of rules stops just before it gets to the "kicking game" section. But the amount of tinkering with the rules every year was amazing. It's perfectly reasonable to assume that at one time, the team scored upon would have the option to kick the ball instead of receiving it. Baseball has done relatively little tinkering since the 60 foot 6 inch pitching distance was established in 1893. The designated hitter was probably the only truly innovative rule change in the 116 years since then. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:20, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there has been some tinkering. They lowered the height of the mound after Bob Gibson; they have been playing with Instant Replay recently, and I expect that soon just about anything outside of balls & strikes will soon be reviewable. But as already noted in the last thread where we talked about this, MOST of the minutae of tinkering in football rules is to control exactly how and in what way you are allowed to collide with someone else; they have all been basically injury control rules, at least since the last major rules on free substitution happened in the 1960's. Back to Nelson's book, worldcat lists the book availible at MANY university libraries. If you click the "search libraries" link at the google books entry I note above, you can find a nearby library where you can find it. --Jayron32 06:30, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, depending on how crazy you want to get, Nelson's original files are still preserved at The University of Delaware Library, so it is still possible to literally go to THE SOURCE on this one. --Jayron32 06:34, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give that a look. Regarding baseball, nearly all the rules since the "Knickerbocker Rules" of 1845 have had to do with balancing offense and defense. Baseball used to be a high-scoring game. Not at the level of cricket, of course, which is like basketball played with bats in that sense. But over time the defense has gained certain advantages, of which the invention of the glove was only one. The rules makers changed the number of "balls" several times, and changed the nature of what a "strike" is to some extent. Once the pitchers were allowed to pitch overhand, it had a negative impact on hitting, so they repositioned the pitching distance, twice (or three times, actually). All of that stuff was prior to 1900, of course. Changes in equipment and expansion of seating (and shrinking of field size) led to changes in strategy, though with very little change to the actual rules. Following 1968, "the year of the pitcher", the rules makers didn't exactly lower the mound. What they did instead was to establish a maximum and uniform height. It was said at the time that the Dodgers pitching mound was the highest in baseball, and the Senators was the lowest. Guess which of those two teams was the more successful during that era. The DH came along over 35 years ago, and MLB still can't make up its mind about it. Instant replay, while it might affect the outcome of a call, doesn't change the basic nature of the game. Using a machine to call balls and strikes might. I think we're a long ways from that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Found it! Page 454 of Nelson's book, link here, states that in 1903 the rule was "The team scored upon shall have the option of kicking off or have the opponents kick off". The copy is missing some pages in this appendix, so, for example, I can't see anything from 1937-1976. The 1922 rule changes may have eliminated this rule, but the wording is hard to follow. We do know that the rule was explicitly allowed from 1903, and I see nothing to contradict that it was still in place by 1916. --Jayron32 06:58, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finally found a reasonly current (2008) NCAA rules book [3] in which it states on pages FR-110 and FR-111, respectively, that the team scoring the touchdown or field goal must kick off. So the answer to OP's question boils down to: Yes, it was legal for Cumberland to kick off the Tech in 1916 after Tech had scored a touchdown; and no, that option is no longer available. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:36, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

+1 for Jayron32. That's awesome. Comet Tuttle (talk) 01:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Richie Rome or Ritchie Rome

A famous producer called Richie Rome. I'm German, but I think Ritchie Rome would be more correctly. Google and discogs knows both names of the same person. So what is right? Thanks in advance -- jlorenz1 (talk) 08:50, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This book uses Ritchie Rome -- jlorenz1 (talk) 09:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The authority file at Library of Congress says Richie Rome.[4] -- KathrynLybarger (talk) 14:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Richie is a nickname for Richard. There's no t in Richard, so the short version wouldn't usually include a t, and none of the notable Richies we list are Ritchies; although some people may prefer to spell their name that way. Richie and Ritchie are also surnames. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:03, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bones

Booth is talking to some guy who cleans cars. The guy mentions he works for a lot of drug dealers without knowing. He further mentions that he has an advert in a "laundromat" (unfamiliar term to me, I'm not American). Booth, shortly before being interrupted, starts to say something linking the drug dealers with the laundromat. Why? Do a lot of drug dealers pay to have their clothes washed? Vimescarrot (talk) 21:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Might it have been a reference to money laundering? 86.142.224.71 (talk) 22:29, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could the laundromat be a front business for a drug ring? Or a place where they make drops (maybe hide a package in a dryer for the next guy to pick it up? Could it just be a public place for criminals to have indiscreet meetings? —Akrabbim^talk 22:41, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In case anyone thought otherwise, the episode was not about the drug dealing or this minor carwashing character - it was just a side conversation that was never referenced in any other part of the episode. So it's more likely to refer to something generally known than anything in-universe. Vimescarrot (talk) 22:46, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the "advert in the laundromat" was a card ("Your Local Car Wash") on a board provided by the laundromat owner. It would be a place where local people come, so a good place to advertise services.Sussexonian (talk) 23:24, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It probably was, from the context, yes. Do drug dealers advertise using these cards or something? O_o Vimescarrot (talk) 06:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's a place people can advertise at no cost and without the kind of critical attention that a newspaper's staff, for example, would give to printed ads. I think that's all. --Anonymous, 08:02 UTC, November 6, 2009.

Self-service businesses are often used for money laundering. It is very easy to do. You put a bunch of washing machines into a store and let people use them. Say you bring in $200 over the week. You can then add another $200 from another source (such as drugs). Then, when it comes time to service the machines, you pay some company $150 to "service" the machines (they don't actually do anything - just take the money). So, you took in $200 for nothing and sent out $150 for nothing, but it all looks legitimate on paper. Multiply those values about a couple thousand and you have a real money laundering business. -- kainaw ™ 18:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Vimescarrot (talk) 11:29, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 6

names of Jeff Beck songs

What are the names of the two songs that Jeff Beck performed at the 2007 Crossroads Guitar Festival that is shown on TV (they aren't on the DVD). Bubba73 (the argument clinic), 08:53, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

beatles songs

What names are used in Beatles songs? I've looked and looked, but there is no comprehensive list anywhere. Listening to or reading every album is a daunting task. My daughter, and several others, are expecting babies and want to add Beatles characters to their "possible names" list.

Someone said there was already a Wiki article with this information, but I can't find it. I figured if anyone would have it, it would be the Wiki. Thanks for your help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.49.21 (talk) 10:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at Category:The Beatles songs. To get you started three off the top of my head are Eleanor Rigby, Julia and Polythene Pam. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 11:56, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Desmond, Molly, Rita, Sadie, Bungalo Bill, Rocky, Dan, McGill, Lil, Nancy... Staecker (talk) 13:02, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Dizzy Miss Lizzie" (or "Lizzy"), although they didn't write it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To find names in titles, start with the album Please Please Me and work your way through the "nexts". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:25, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Anna (Go to Him)" (also not written by the Beatles). Their early work very seldom mentioned names, other than "Baby". They also covered "Long Tall Sally". "Michelle (song)" appears to be their first original song that mentions a name. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Doctor Robert", although that has questionable connotations. "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds". Several names mentioned in "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite!", which also has underlying drug implications, supposedly. "When I'm Sixty-Four", which mentions Vera, Chuck and Dave. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC) Vera, Chuck and Dave are the grandchildren Mitch Ames (talk) 03:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly characters, but Ringo mentioned George by name in some of his songs; and John mentioned Paul in "I Am the Walrus". "Dear Prudence" from the white album, along with the names Staecker mentioned that turn up in various other songs on that work, as well as "Martha My Dear". "Julia" was actually about Julian Lennon, as I recall. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:44, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not forget "Hey, Jude", which I think was also about Julian. "Maxwell's Silver Hammer", about Maxwell Edison, majoring in Medicine, mentions a woman named Joan. "Her Majesty (song)" doesn't mention the Queen by name. If they had thought about it, they could have called it "Straight-Laced Lizzy". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Julia is about John's mother (or possibly Yoko in an Oedipal sort of way). Hey Jude is about Julian. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aha. I do believe you're right. Continuing... "Get Back" mentions a guy named Joe-Joe, and a woman named Loretta. The Let It Be album also includes the song "Maggie Mae". I seem to have misplaced the song "Lady Madonna" somewhere. There's also an obscure number from that session called "Teddy Boy". Ok, I'm about Beatled out by now. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:55, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you count Anthology stuff, then there is also What's the New Mary Jane. Adam Bishop (talk) 16:46, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does "Albert" count? "Now they know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall". I know it's referring to a concert hall, but still... 99.166.95.142 (talk) 17:07, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That also gets into the less-interesting and irrelevant-to-the-questioner's subject about any kind of proper names the Beatles might have used, e.g. Blackburn, Lancashire; Penny Lane; etc. It also occurred to me that in "Honey Don't", Ringo said, "All right George, rock on for Ringo one time," which means John would be the only one of the four not mentioned by name in a Beatles song. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:44, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He was mentioned in the title (but not the lyrics) of "The Ballad of John and Yoko", so is the only one of the four mentioned in a title. That more than balances it out, I think. Dendodge _T\^C 18:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duh! I was only checking the albums and forgot about that one. Or else I forgot it was considered Beatles and not just John and Yoko. So the OP's grandaughters could be called Yoko also. Or maybe NOT. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:56, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The continuing story of Bungalow Bill. Michelle. Martha My Dear. Lovely Rita Meter Maid. Penny (in Penny Lane, maybe it doesn't count as it's not a person's name there). Billy (Billy Shears in With A Little Help From My Friends). (Lady) Madonna. Jo-Jo, Sweet Loretta Martin (in Get Back). (Mother) Mary in Let It Be. Polythene Pam. My Bonnie (not their song). Maggie Mae. Doctor Robert. Sexy Sadie. Georgia (in Back in the USSR, not as a name). Tinfoilcat (talk) 21:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tracking down a Porn Star

I just found out that a girl I knew in school a couple of years ago has made an adult film. I know her real name and the title of the film. Where can I look up stage names she used and other films she was in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.60.31.103 (talk) 17:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd try iafd.com to see if the film's name is listed. -- kainaw ™ 18:23, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We have a pornacopia of links in our own Pornography WikiProject here for other reliable sources of film info. Dismas|^(talk) 01:32, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that the IMDB has entries for her and the film. Whether they have a listing with her real name depends on whether anyone's ever submitted that information to them, which I guess is unlikely if she's only been doing this for a couple of years. But you could try searching there on her real name. Or you could look up the movie by title (you have to be a registered user to do this for porn titles) and follow the links to female cast members and their "biography" pages. --Anonymous, 03:10 UTC, November 7, 2009.

November 7

music video of replay by iyaz

Who is the main actress in the music video? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.54.128.229 (talk) 04:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, which video? Britmax (talk) 08:19, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure they mean this song. —Akrabbim^talk 14:52, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Films based on advertising characters

I'm aware of Johnny English and Critical Assignment, but are there any other films based around a character previously seen only in commercials? GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 08:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly films, but close: The California Raisins had several albums and a few TV shows. Chester Cheetah and The Noid both had videogames, there were some Ronald McDonald films (all straight-to-video), and of course Cookie Monster began as an advertising character (though the ads never aired). Staecker (talk) 12:59, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a film, but there was a (short) TV show based on the GEICO cavemen. —Akrabbim^talk 14:56, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ernest P. Worrell was originally created for television commercials. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:04, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Carson starred in The Good Humor Man. Aunt Jemima began as a song, then as a character associated with a pancake mix, then as a spokesperson portrayed by several actresses. Tess Gardella portrayed the character in a film and then adopted the name as a pseudonym for both her Broadway and film roles. Pepso2 (talk) 16:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Crash test dummies (made popular by PSAs) had their own toy line (The Incredible Crash Dummies), and on those was based a short made-for-tv movie (The Incredible Crash Dummies (film)). There is also a series of (direct to video) features, The Wacky Adventures of Ronald McDonald.

I suppose the Transformers might also count, since they had a movie and TV show based on the toys. Adam Bishop (talk) 22:08, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The character C. W. McCall was originally created for an advertising campaign, and the singer in the advertising campaign (the actor who played McCall was a different person) later went on to score hits with songs like Convoy which was itself made into a movie, 1973's Convoy. Thus, we have an ad campaign that gives birth to a fake singer, who has a real hit song, which was later made into a plot for a movie. --Jayron32 01:41, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

futurama-godfellas

In the futurama episode godfellas (season 3) when bender is drifting through space and starts playing the little piano does anyone know the name of the piano piece he is playing and who wrote it?Syme1 (talk) 18:31, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is Chopin's Polonaise in C Minor. -- kainaw ™ 20:40, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further, the recording they used is played by Ken Keeler - who is not a professional pianist. -- kainaw ™ 20:43, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The name of this Australian band and its female singer

I'm having trouble remembering the name and the singer of a band. The singer is female, blonde hair and has a very large and noticeable red birthymark on her upper body. I believe the band is Australian and has a name beginning with 'The'. The first name of the of the leader singer was something uncommonly used as a name. I'm thinking it starts with a P though I am not quite sure.

I haven't heard any of their songs or know what genre they are, though I would venture to guess they are indie/pop/rock.

Thanks

99.250.7.109 (talk) 22:20, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tricky one... I've gone through the dozen or so Aussie bands with lead female vocalists I could think of, but I'm drawing a blank - have you tried searching through Category:Australian rock music groups? Of course, if they're not Aussies, it opens the door to a load of others... Grutness...wha? 23:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to go with Patience, the lead singer for the band The Grates. (Looks like she doesn't have her own article) --Onorem ♠Dil 23:18, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good call - it looks like Patience Hodgson does indeed have a birthmark covering much of her upper body, if [these, images are anything to go by. Grutness...wha? 00:18, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sailor song

Anybody know the name of this song, It was produced in early 2000s , 2000 - 2003 , and the music vid was an big ship with sailors singing and i THINk it was in an movie. The sailors wore light blue and white clothes and an light blue hat... like donald duck. It was not animated --- 85.220.45.158 (talk) 23:10, 7 November 2009 (UTC) THANX.[reply]

Probably wrong time period, but perhaps There Is Nothing Like a Dame on the Morecambe and Wise Christmas show, 1977? It featured many celebrities of time, including Eddie Waring, all dressed as sailors shoving mops and buckets around a stage made up to look like a ship. Astronaut (talk) 02:16, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but I don't think it was this old, maybe from 1990s - early 2000s. 85.220.45.158 (talk) 03:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What song is this?

I remember seeing a music video either from the 80s or the 90s which started out with a giant woman wrapped in layer upon layer of clothes but with a normal-sized head, and as the artist sang to her crews on scaffolding and in helicopters peeled off the clothes, until at the end of the video, the now normal-sized woman stood in front of the artist, who took off the last article of clothing, only to find out that she had no body and was just a floating head. The head then floated away. What was the song and artist? I don't remember any lyrics, just the strange imagery. 71.161.60.125 (talk) 23:45, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 8

all time favorite camp song

My son and i just got back from a boyscout overnight dad & lad camping trip at camp thunderbird in olympia washington. At breakfast the scouts that were running this event sang a song called johnny rabec(sp) or maybe sausages. the chouris gose something like "Ooh mr. mr. Johnny rabec how could you be so mean. I told you you'd be sory for inventing that machine. Now all the neightbors cats and dogs will never again be seen. Ooh mr mr johnny Rabec how could you be so mean." Now that we are back home my son and i would like to get the rest of the words to the song if you could help that would be much appriciated.

                                                            Karter and David
                                                            Aberdeen Washington

P.S. if there are any other camp songs that you Know the words to I would like them also.