Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:43, 25 November 2019

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 18

Reliable sources for “Chief Wiggum” as a character

I’m finding tons of false positives while looking for detailed sources about The Simpson’s Chief Wiggum, any leads? Gleeanon409 (talk) 01:20, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What info are you looking for ? I would think the episodes featuring him would be the best refs for basic biographical data, as much as it is defined at all. (I know they gave his first name as Clancy, and his "special" son's name is Ralph, but I don't recall them listing his wife's name.) SinisterLefty (talk) 01:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Non-primary sources at least. Gleeanon409 (talk) 11:50, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on Chief Wiggum, with some references you could follow. (And his wife's name is Sarah). Matt Deres (talk) 16:50, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I’m looking for more, and better sources, to add to the article. Gleeanon409 (talk) 17:04, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That article is being discussed for deletion. There's no question the character exists. The question is whether he merits his own article. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:30, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think that may be the point, to find sources that show the character has been discussed in depth and out of universe. 2602:306:CE95:57B0:46B:A6B1:CDF3:A041 (talk) 11:34, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bake 'em away, toys. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The AfD closed, but if anyone finds something not used in the article I’ll try to use it. Gleeanon409 (talk) 13:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hfuhruhurr

User:86.132.221.234 asked this question at Talk:The Man with Two Brains two years ago but never got an answer. So I'm reasking it here.

What, if anything, is the connection between this Hfuhruhurr (Michael Hfuhruhurr, played by Steve Martin) and the one mentioned in Hfuhruhurr? JIP | Talk 12:01, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The movie is a comedy, and the name sounds funny. --Jayron 32 12:44, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since the movie (1983) predates the appearance in the comics (1987), presumably the comics copied the name. The chances of them having independently come up with that name twice seem remote. If we assumed 10 random letters, that would give us 10²⁶ possibilities, although most of those are presumably unpronounceable (not that that stopped comics from using the name Mxyzptlk). SinisterLefty (talk) 16:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TvTropes (Not a reliable source by Wikipedia standards) seems to think that the comic character was inspired by the Steve Martin movie: [1]. IMDB (also not a reliable source by Wikipedia standards) says the same: [2]. I can't find any other sources better than those, however. --Jayron 32 17:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Castle bridges in Beauty and the Beast (1991)

There appears to be at least two castle bridges in the 1991 film: the northern one, from which Maurice enters the castle in the beginning, and the western one, using the castle's west wing as a reference point. The western one is also possibly the same which Gaston and his party pass during the final fight (if it's not the third bride). The bridges could also be distinguished by different entrance doors. However, there's always only one bridge seen adjacent to the castle. Is it just an internal inconsistency or something else? 212.180.235.46 (talk) 23:30, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since it is a work of fiction, and an animated one at that, you should always start with the presumption that any continuity errors are made because the people making the film didn't try to avoid them; it was something they didn't consider important to telling the narrative. --Jayron 32 13:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which 212.180 acknowledged by saying "is it just an internal inconsistency...", yes? --76.69.116.4 (talk) 02:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was a question. I believe I provided an answer. The problem is a continuity error. --Jayron 32 13:33, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You provided an assumption. The OP asked whether it was the correct assumption. --76.69.116.4 (talk) 07:28, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the OP should ask the creators of the cartoon. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:34, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Several web pages (like this one for example) suggest that the castle was inspired by the Château de Chambord, one of the Châteaux of the Loire Valley, which only has one bridge because the moat is just for ornament and doesn't go all the way around (on further comparison, it also lacks the vertiginous chasms of the Disney version, so probably not all that helpful). Alansplodge (talk) 17:22, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I also found this plan of the Beauty and the Beast castle with only one bridge, but whether it came from the Disney studio or was drawn by a fan, I cannot tell. Alansplodge (talk) 17:30, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 20

Drama Channel off Air?

I live in Germany, watch regularly British TV via Satellite, mostly (ITV 3 and) Drama. As from yesterday I get a black screen, whenever I switch to Drama. Does anyoneknow what is the matter and how can I resolve it? Thank you.--93.230.73.237 (talk) 05:41, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The website for the channel, here, appears to be up and running, and indicates that it is still broadcasting. I can find no evidence that it is not. The likely problem lies not with the channel, but with your television provider. You should contact the customer service phone number of whoever you pay for your TV, and ask if there is an issue. Often, TV providers and channels will get into arguments over compensation, and the provider will pull the channel until such arguments are resolved. There is a chance that is happening as well. However, your best avenue is to contact your TV provider directly. --Jayron 32 13:32, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It's different in Germany. I (must) pay for ARD/ZDF (our BBC; license fee) even though I do not watch them, but I have no (technical) "Provider", whom I could phone. I have a satellite disk on the roof which will get all "free" stations it receives, that is have their space on the satellites (from the UK that ist BBC, ITV, Channel 4/5, and as of last week Drama, Dave and Yesterday). So probably something technically has happened in the transmission. Obviously there are customers in the UK who do not get their tv via broadband, but via satellite otherwise I don't see, why BBC/ITV would be on ASTRA at all.--93.230.73.237 (talk) 17:06, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Solved. I asked in the German Reference Desk and was told to look in lyngsat.com. There I found the position (probably changed bei UKTV) and could manually update my receiver.--93.230.73.12 (talk) 17:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 24

Disney+

Would it make sense for Disney to stop releasing their new movies in the theaters to focus on an early release on Disney+? Ericdec85 (talk) 12:37, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It might, or it might not. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:00, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That answer was useless. -- Ericdec85 11:40, 25 November 2019‎ (UTC)

You got something better? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:41, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but your question asks for opinions, which we're not supposed to do here. Whatever you think of Disney, there is 100% agreement that they know how to make money; you can rest assured that they'll do whatever they think will help them do that. But consider this: their movies have high replay value (as you can see by their DVD/BD sales), so there would seem to be little to gain by not having films release to theatres and then grabbing the replay dollars via Disney+ (while still grabbing some via physical media sales due to their continued use of the dreaded Disney vault). Matt Deres (talk) 18:05, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oscars

I am a big fan of films, and would like to know where to get the best Oscar predictions. Who has, historically, been the best at predicting Oscar winners and nominations?68.129.97.180 (talk) 19:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube rumors

I was watching some videos on YouTube. There were quite a few indicating it'll be history in 2020. Are any of them true or are they rumors?2604:2000:1281:4B3:54E4:510A:625:39E2 (talk) 23:18, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What's the exact wording? Or can you post an example? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:28, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some channels which were intended to make money for their creators haven't been making enough. (Mine wasn't intended to make money.) There are also rumors people plan to storm the YouTube headquarters. Their intentions are to prevent the company from demonetizing some stuff.2604:2000:1281:4B3:54E4:510A:625:39E2 (talk) 00:30, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you get this story of someone "storming the YouTube headquarters"? Is that the same source that talked about storming Area 51? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's on the internet so it must be true. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 07:48, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this stems in part from YouTube saying something along the lines of if you get a certain number of subscribers you will get paid X. However they are now saying that if you simply re-post other people's material without substantially changing this or adding to it, you will not get paid. This has caused many popular channels to no longer be economically viable. I doubt any action will be taken against YouTube but suspect that many will move to Patreon. Thanks Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 10:38, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly sure YouTube has never paid people simply for having a high subscriber count, at least not in a consistent fashion. Youtube only ever pays people for ad views on their videos, along with whatever they do for Youtube Red or whatever the heck it's called now, and channel membership. You do need to meet some subscriber and other requirements to become a partner so you can even be eligible for payment/monetisation [3] [4], but that's a different point. Likewise creating content for Youtube Red also requires Youtube/Google to let you. And being able to join the channel membership programme has its own requirements [5]. The last is I guess the closest thing to being paid simply for having subscribers (and on Twitch etc they tend to be called subscriptions), but in this case people are paying Youtube to pay the person, it's not really that different from Patreon except may with different eligibility requirements and features. Youtube can and does change their rules for joining and staying in the partner programme (and other programmes), as well the which videos are eligible for monetisation etc. And this can have quite a significant effect on those relying on them. But again, this isn't the same thing as Youtube promosing to pay people simply for having subscribers. Nil Einne (talk) 12:45, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I think Anton's comment may be some further confusion over [6]. I'd note that according to that source, it was simply some confusion over an update T&C. And second, even if Youtube did start to regularly terminate channels for not being "commercially viable" it doesn't change the fact channels only got paid for ad views etc on their videos rather than simply for having a certain number of subscribers. As I said above, joining the partner programme is only the start of the monetisation process. Nil Einne (talk) 12:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said before, my channel on YouTube wasn't intended to make money. I joined to explore and be creative, that's it.2604:2000:1281:4B3:68CD:3578:16B:24DB (talk) 23:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 25

@@ Line 84: / Line 84: @@
 :I'm fairly sure YouTube has never paid people simply for having a high subscriber count, at least not in a consistent fashion. Youtube only ever pays people for ad views on their videos, along with whatever they do for Youtube Red or whatever the heck it's called now, and channel membership. You do need to meet some subscriber and other requirements to become a partner so you can even be eligible for payment/monetisation [https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/72857] [//support.google.com/youtube/answer/72851], but that's a different point. Likewise creating content for Youtube Red also requires Youtube/Google to let you. And being able to join the channel membership programme has its own requirements [//support.google.com/youtube/answer/7636690]. The last is I guess the closest thing to being paid simply for having subscribers (and on Twitch etc they tend to be called subscriptions), but in this case people are paying Youtube to pay the person, it's not really that different from Patreon except may with different eligibility requirements and features. Youtube can and does change their rules for joining and staying in the partner programme (and other programmes), as well the which videos are eligible for monetisation etc. And this can have quite a significant effect on those relying on them. But again, this isn't the same thing as Youtube promosing to pay people simply for having subscribers. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 12:45, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 ::P.S. I think Anton's comment may be some further confusion over [//9to5google.com/2019/11/11/youtube-terminate-channels-not-commercially-viable/]. I'd note that according to that source, it was simply some confusion over an update T&C. And second, even if Youtube did start to regularly terminate channels for not being "commercially viable" it doesn't change the fact channels only got paid for ad views etc on their videos rather than simply for having a certain number of subscribers. As I said above, joining the partner programme is only the start of the monetisation process. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 12:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
+:::Like I said before, my channel on YouTube wasn't intended to make money. I joined to explore and be creative, that's it.[[Special:Contributions/2604:2000:1281:4B3:68CD:3578:16B:24DB|2604:2000:1281:4B3:68CD:3578:16B:24DB]] ([[User talk:2604:2000:1281:4B3:68CD:3578:16B:24DB|talk]]) 23:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 = November 25 =