Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Reference desk

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wochende (talk | contribs) at 17:51, 16 December 2008 (→anti-drug videos). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to the entertainment section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
skip to bottom
Select a section:
Shortcut
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.
See also:


December 10

NFL playoffs, and teams with 2 ties

In the NFL playoffs article, I was trying to find out what happened if a team finished with 2 ties; specifically Philadelphia were to finish 9-5-2 this year, and Dallas 10-6. And, let's say they split their head to head matchups. According to the article, "won-lost-tie percentage" is considered. Is that implying that this is different than normal won-loss percentage?

Since there hasn't been a tie in several years in the NFL, I wasn't sure how this worked, but I was under the impression that ties cancelled each other out, so under that scenario, Phiadelphia and Dallas would still be tied and they would have to go to the next tiebreaker. Is that right, or would Phiadelphia have an advatage because they tied two games instead of going 1-1 in them. (And thus would be "better," at 9-5, than Dallas at 10-6?)

Thanks in advance.Somebody or his brother (talk) 01:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tie-breaking only applies to teams with identical records. 9-5-2 is not identical to 10-6-0. So, no tie-breaker is needed. 10 wins is more than 9 wins. -- kainaw™ 03:30, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not so. Per the NFL, tiebreaking procedures are invoked for teams with identical "won-lost-tied percentages". Normally a tie is considered half a win and half a loss, so 9-5-2 would be identical to 10-6-0; 9-5-2 is not considered as if it were 9-5-0. Note that this is distinct from a league like the NHL, where ties are common but number of wins is an early tiebreaker. — Lomn 15:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Further references: our article on the NFL playoffs notes that in the league's early years, ties were omitted, leading to 6-1-6 and 6-1-4 being considered identical (and superior to 10-3-1). The Elias Sports Bureau uses 1971-1972 as the transition point; ties in or prior to 1971 are disregarded, while ties in 1972 and beyond are considered the half-win half-loss format. — Lomn 15:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lomn has it right; under the old system (prior to 1971) the NFL used only numbers of wins and losses to calculate win percentage, with a "tie" counting as zero wins and zero losses. After 1971, the tie was changed to count as 1/2 win and 1/2 loss, thus altering the way "win percentage" was calculated. Both 10-6-0 and 9-5-2 would have identical .625 win percentages, so would activate the tie-breaking procedures. See National Football League playoffs#Breaking ties for more on these. Given that a "tie" happens about 2-3 times a decade in the NFL, it would be exceedingly rare for the same team to get two in one season. Since the institution of "sudden death overtime" in 1974, there have only been 13 tie games in the NFL, and the only year with multiple tie games was in 1997, when there were 2. Over that time period, there have been about (rough estimate) 20,000 games played. Having the same team get two in the same season would be unprecedented. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I did not know that. I though that the tie was 1/2 win and 1/2 loss, so it cancelled itself out. However, I can see that (9+0.5)/(5+0.5) is not the same as (9/5)+(1/2 - 1/2). -- kainaw™ 18:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, as the math works out, two ties will cancel each other out (since you would add 1 win and 1 loss to the record). Thus a 0-0-16 record would be mathematically identical to a 8-8-0 record. However, with an odd number of ties (and since no team since 1974 has had more than one) it gets a little weird. Given the math, if you have a winning record with one tie, the tie is just as good as a loss, since the half game will drag down the wins more than it drags up the losses. However, if you have a losing record, a tie has a greater effect on the number of wins, thus in those cases a tie is as good as a win. Given that it is nearly impossible for a team with a losing record to make the playoffs (it is mathematically possible, but in practice it never happens) for the purposes of playoff qualification, you will often hear comentators state "A tie is as good as a loss". Which it is... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First slasher film

Which is the first slasher film ever made? The article slasher film does not give any particular name. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I searched google and the results are more confusing. Some claim Psycho was the first slasher film [1], some claim In My Skin [2], some claim Dementia 13 [3] or Torso [4]. I am totally confused. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
From the Torso link you gave, and from what is in the slasher film article, it sounds a bit like asking what the first democracy was, or what the first rock song was; it all depends on your criteria for what a true slasher film is. AlexiusHoratius 13:08, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Un Chien Andalou (1929)? Don't overlook Aroused (1966) and George Segal's vicious attack on a waterbed in The Terminal Man (1974). Pepso2 (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I vote for The Texas Chainsaw Massacre from 1974. It contained the arch-villian Leatherface, similar to later characters Michael Myers from Halloween (1978 film), Freddy Krueger from Friday the 13th (1980 film), and Chucky from Child's Play (1988). StuRat (talk) 03:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Psychology jobs

Are there any fun Psychology jobs in the entertainment business? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.144.145 (talk) 21:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Psychologists can be consultants for film and tv shows, and have their own radio, tv or training films (Dr. Phil is the most obvious) so there's a lot going on in the consultancy and performance field for experts. Google[5] gives you Stan Katz, Steven Sabat[6] for the film Memory, Dr. Sherry Roth, and there's whoever was consultant for The Sopranos psychologist Dr Jennifer Melfi, Halifax f.p., and the film Like Minds. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:08, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You could be a shrink to the stars or an I/O psychologist for an entertainment company.--droptone (talk) 12:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only When I Sleep

Was Only When I Sleep (from Talk on Corners) based on an old Irish tune? If yes, which one? --Kjoonlee 23:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


December 11

Sebastian's Journal?

Does anyone know where I could find a journal that closely resembles the one Sebastian used in Cruel Intentions ? I've been searching all over the internet with no luck. Thank you Breadchastick (talk) 02:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like standard A4 paper with plastic ring bind. SN0WKITT3N 10:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NFL kickoff - what does the official throw?

During football games, during a kickoff (and maybe punts), an official (back judge?) near the receiver throws something on the ground, usually in the vicinity of the receiver. It almost looks like a black piece of rubber, but could be something like a black flag. What is it and why does he do that? (I've been trying to find videos, but have so far been unsuccessful, probably due to the NFL removing videos from YouTube, etc.) Also, looking through the Digest of the NFL Rulebook and and older version of the official rules, but still nothing. Any thoughts? --Bennybp (talk) 04:20, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a link to read about all their duties. I had wondered the same thing.

http://football.about.com/cs/football101/a/bl_officials.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by JelloTube (talk • contribs) 04:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's marking the point at which the return began. I'm not sure of the specifics, but I expect it's for penalties like holding. On a standard play from scrimmage, holding behind the line of scrimmage is enforced from the line of scrimmage (holding downfield is enforced from the point of infraction). Generally holding on kickoffs/punts is downfield and thus from the point of infraction, but perhaps if the return man retreats backwards, penalties back there are enforced only from where the return began. I can't say that I've ever seen this rule, if applicable, come into play. — Lomn 14:28, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The official throws a small blue beanbag. The beanbag is used to mark "change of possession" in certain situations where the exact location of the change of possession matters to the rules. You will see it come out at all punts, kickoffs, and fumble recoveries (but, interestingly, not interceptions!), where the location of the change-of-posession matters. There are different rules for advancing the ball past the point of first contact of fumbles, kicks, and punts, and in situations where the actual spot of first contact with the ball matters, the beanbag is used to mark that spot.
For example, on punts, the kicking team may ONLY recover the punt if the receiving team touches the ball, so the beanbag can be used to show that the ball has been touched by the receiving team and is thus "live".
Likewise, there are rules about the offense advancing fumbles (specifically, the team which fumbles may not advance the recovered fumble further than the location of the fumble if the defense doesn't touch the ball, to prevent plays like the Holy Roller and the Fumblerooski. In these situations, the beanbag is used to mark the location of the fumble to determine the spot of the ball should the offense try to advance it past this point. In some plays (for example, with a fumbled snap exchange from center to QB) the beanbag is not often used, since the location of the fumble (officially, the old line of scrimage) is clear, and thus the beanbag is not needed. There are no rules where the location of an interception is important, so they don't mark those either.
Here's a pdf file: [7] that discusses proper use of the beanbag.
The other things that officials throw are a) a yellow flag if there is a penalty and b) their hat to indicate that a player has gone out-of-bounds, and is thus inelligible to return to the play. They will also throw their hat if they either don't have their flag (for example, for a second penalty on the same play) or beanbag (if, for example, there are 2 changes of possession on the same play). --Jayron32.talk.contribs 14:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! I had wondered that for a while. Kinda makes sense now :) --Bennybp (talk) 22:02, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There was an incident a couple of years ago, where an official threw his beanbag into the middle of a fumble pileup, and hit one of the players in the eye, injuring his eye and putting the player out of action for a while. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 00:27, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the player, Orlando Brown, was hit in the eye by a flag. Usually, officials "wrap" the flag around a heavy object (like another bean bag, though I don't know if there is a standard object) so that the flag will actually go where the official throws it (the flag is supposed to hit the ground where the infraction occured, again for marking yardage purposes). It was a tragic event, as Brown never made a full recovery. It wasn't really anyones "fault" since officials are instructed to throw the flag at the player who commits the infraction. There was some buloney about how the flag was "improperly modified" but it was always my understanding that this was mainly a legal move so that Brown could get paid by the NFL for his injury... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:09, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hockey

Is ice hockey the only sport where the players are allowed to go behind the goal? I'm not counting baseball where the catcher is behind home plate since you obviously need someone there to catch. Dismas|(talk) 07:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They can do it in lacrosse, too. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, maybe not, nevermind... Adam Bishop (talk) 09:20, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They can definately do it in lacrosse, men's lacrosse anyway, I'm not sure about the ladies game. MookieZ (talk) 15:07, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well in Rugby you can go behind the 'goal' to get a try, or you can kick it over the 'goal' for point. I've been thinking about it a bit and I can't think of any other game where you can go behind the goal with the ball in the same way as in ice hockey. In Basketball you can be 'beyond' the hoop but it's only a tiny little amount of space and it's not like in ice-hockey where a big amount of the play utilizes the feature. I guess what you're looking for is a sport that is played in A) A confined space and B) Has fast-paced movement that can't slow down quickly - after all it'd be much harder to rush the goal in ice-hockey if you didn't have those 4/5 yards after the goal to slow-down, so it might as well be playing space. I'll look and see if I can find another one, good question! 09:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.221.133.226 (talk)
In baseball the runner can go around home plate then come back to tag it, within reason of course.--droptone (talk) 12:47, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What about basketball/netball?? Technically you can be behind the net and still be inside the court (just)? In fact as long as your feet don't touch the ground you can be completely outside the court and still score over the top of the backboard if you're lucky. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Korfball. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I believe rugby is a better answer than what 194.221 makes of it. Play can really take place in the in-goal area, i.e. behind the goal posts, for some time. A team can pass and/or run the ball within their own in-goal area to move sideways and try to find a better position to kick or run out from. Also, a try is not scored until the ball touches the ground. Conversion kicks have to be taken straight out from where the grounding took place. Because of that, attacking players will often try to run within the in-goal area to try to make the grounding in a more central position. I.e. they run, and make the grounding when they are behind the goalposts. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 17:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question on Father Ted

In which episode does tom hit ted in his car after ted tries to hitch a lift? It's on the comedy connections episode of father ted. As the car gets closer to ted he keeps saying "please" as his face gets more and more desperate. Tom then hits him and Ted falls onto the windowscreen. Tom then says "sorry about that Father" to ted. Dougal is not in sight.Darkside2000 (talk) 09:22, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd reckon it's this one. Fribbler (talk) 16:47, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Coverting audio of YouTube videos into MP3

Is there a way to convert audio of YouTube videos into MP3 files? David Pro (talk) 13:00, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two ways:
  1. Directly record from you pc's sound card while the video plays. You can do this with most audio recoding programs, I recommend Audacity. Just set the default recoding device to your sound card, click record and play the video.
  2. Or, you could download the flv from youtube with a site like this, then open it in VLC media player. In VLC go to file -> Wizard and chose "Transcode/save to file", click next. Select "existing playlist item", click next, then check the Audio option only and select MP3 as the output. SN0WKITT3N 13:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can download the audio exactly how it is in the video using this site, just type in the URL and hit download. Just be careful with copyright laws. [8] Strifeblade (talk) 15:03, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. I'd make sure you read the YouTube terms of use before doing this. Additionally - I don't know what level of compression YouTube uses on uploaded audio, but it can't be pretty. [ cycle~ ] (talk), 17:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When I updated my RealPlayer to the latest version, it automatically gave you the option of downloading videos (including YouTube videos). They download in .flv format, but then you can find another process to convert them from .flv to .mp3. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 00:29, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to mention the RealPlayer thing too - once the videos are saved to your hard drive you can then "burn to audio disk" which automatically converts them to MP3... If you don't like the sound quality you get from youtube though then you can use a website called "www.file2hd.com"... On that site you copy and paste the http address of the location of the file you want, and it will go to that site and give you a download link for every downloadable file on that site (not including the graphics of the site itself). If you download the link it gives you for the video it will download it at the quality it was made... Use the techniques above to convert it to MP3 then... It does that same job as RealPlayer but is often better quality download that off youtube directly... Gazhiley (talk) 10:30, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's also a website called http://www.vixy.net It can turn Youtube videos into either video+audio files or just MP3 audio files.--el Aprel (facta-facienda) 21:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note that downloading and saving copyrighted music from YouTube is illegal, and perhaps more important, it hurts your favorite artists by depriving them of income. --S.dedalus (talk) 22:10, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
true, but if it's on youtube how is that a problem? it's already been released for free public viewing, so how is that illegal? if it was illegal then why would it give you the option to download it? plus 99% of videos on there are loaded with the author's intention of being available for public use - otherwise they'd host it somewhere private and prevent you from downloading it - for example on the itv, C4 and bbc online "catch up" sites you cannot download the files as they are security protected. There would be an option on youtube to protect your upload this way if you didn't want people to save it... Gazhiley (talk) 12:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
the FLV format and the iPod MP4 format are interchangeable, FYI. In reality, all you have to do is change the extension. Then you can have the video as well :)  Buffered Input Output 17:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Napoléon (1927 film)

Is that movie in the public domain?--Tresckow (talk) 16:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not in the US. Anything before 1923 can be in the public domain, but some had their copyright renewed anyway - so even that isn't foolproof. 1927 is simply too late. - Mgm|(talk) 23:59, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Um, you have it backwards. Well, sideways. If it was from before 1923 it would have to be public domain in the US; from 1927 it could be, depending on whether the copyright was renewed. I have no idea whether it was -- or, for that matter, what country's copyright the original poster is asking about. --Anonymous, 04:45 UTC, December 12, 2008.

kiss

who sang the original kiss ( i want your kiss) tom jones or prince?77.28.50.27 (talk) 16:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prince. --Richardrj talk email 16:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes indeed it was Prince. Our article: Kiss (song) also provides information on cover versions. cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 16:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

some video game

1: it involves a guy named bouapha

2: it involves big red hammers

i cant remember anything else...i had the game on my computer a long time ago (around 1999) and for some reason i can't find the installer for the game. can someone help?  Buffered Input Output 17:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably either Dr. Lunatic or The Adventures of Bouapha. --LarryMac | Talk 18:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


December 12

A&E Biography reference

I came across the following sentence that needs clean up in David Cassidy: According to a 2000 interview of his series' star on A&E Biography, Cassidy said that he wanted to hate his stepmother, but after his mother's real-life divorce, she immediately step in as he began to love her. I assume the end should read: she immediately stepped in and he began to love her. Could s.o. who has the original A&E Biography please verify. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 00:25, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two things. We're not generally supposed to be quoting exact text from sources, so even if it did say "step in" (highly unlikely, imho), there's no reason to just copy that error word for word. I suspect it's an editor's error in attempting to write good English. This is the sort of thing that should be corrected on sight, without any need to check sources. So, please feel free to change it in the way you suggest. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:55, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since the sentence had 2 snafus I just wanted to make sure that what I supposed it should read as was what it should read. Just checking. Correction done. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 05:07, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do I beat level 7 in Wik fable of souls

i keep having trouble,epbr123 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellojello3 (talk • contribs) 01:29, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest a popular search engine for this info - type in the name of the game and also hints and tips - there's hundreds of sites and forums where they discuss these things - i used this for a few games eg GTA4 for the maps of the locations of the special items etc - really helpful... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gazhiley (talk • contribs) 12:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A term that will help you out when searching is "walkthrough" - This is the word most people now use when describing "how do I beat level X in game Y" -- 76.201.159.67 (talk) 18:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

other fictional airline

I know Oceanic Airlines is fictional. But I saw some promos for a couple CBS programs with another fictional airline. What was the fictional airline, and was it on Eleventh Hour or Without A Trace?72.229.139.171 (talk) 06:43, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of shows will use fictional names of airlines (or other companies) if the company is going to look bad as a result. So the fictional Oceanic is used in Lost because it crashed. If the airline is going to feature only to get the protagonists somewhere, while providing excellent service, then they will probably use a real name. Likewise if Law and Order have to investigate a fast food chain that is poisoning its customers you can bet it won't be a real one. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oceanic is an unusual case because the same fictional name has been used in multiple TV shows and movies, as explained in the article. This is because airplanes are expensive and the same shots of one have been reused. In general, shows wanting to use a fictional business name will make up a new one. --Anonymous, 05:28 UTC, December 14, 2008.

Alright. I'm still waiting to find out what the fictional airline name was in either Eleventh Hour or Without A Trace.72.229.139.171 (talk) 00:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Films about Nordic mythology

I'm looking for the films where the Nordic gods like Odin and Loki would be presented. No matter what country, no matter if silent or normal, I just need some films on that subject. I've tried to search myself, but I don't speak any scandinavian language. Does anyone know something that can be useful to me? Thanks a lot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.78.117.186 (talk) 14:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not limited to films, but it might be a good start. Tomdobb (talk) 14:25, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thor's Hammer 194.80.240.66 (talk) 14:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And of course we have the upcoming Thor (film) BioYu-Gi! (talk) 21:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Valhalla (1986) for an animated Danish film. You can watch it with English subtitles on youtube. ---Sluzzelin talk 06:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You could check films based on Wagner (IMDb list), particularly Die Walküre and Das Rheingold. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 14:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to recall hearing sometime that some of Shakespeare's work is based on nordic mythology. A quick search (without reading into them, just the search results) suggests Hamlet is based on an old norse myth. Might be worth looking into that perspective as most of Shakespeare's plays will have been made into films (either for cinema or for tv/video release). ny156uk (talk) 23:09, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But there are no Norse gods in Hamlet, or in the original story (which is told by Saxo Grammaticus by the way). Anyway, how about The Thirteenth Warrior, or any other films with Vikings? The gods themselves may not be present but they are usually there as part of the charaters' religion. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:54, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fritz Lang's Siegfried and Kriemhild's Revenge -- noosphere 09:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Purgatorio by Roberto Rochín Naya, any review available

I have been looking for some reviews on this film and find none. Certainly, this is not going to be an insignificant film. 59.91.254.11 (talk) 21:29, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Best I can find is this, near the bottom is discusses Purgatorio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.88.87 (talk) 18:09, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Les contes de Juan Rulfo.

Nous avons bien aimé le film, son originalité et son étrangeté. Pour ma part j'aimais des grands plans sur les visages, les paysages sobres, sombres et angoissants du Mexique et particulièrement la 2ème et la 3ème histoire, découvrant des excellents acteurs. Certains plans sont vraiment saisissants comme celui de reflets de silhouettes dans la flaque d'eau. On a bien aimé certaines réflexions comme celles concernant les hommes morts. Sylwia F (sept,2008)


Dans les années 50, sur sa voie vers la modernité le Mexique est touché par une transition douloureuse. Bonfilio quitte sa famille en la laissant sous la protection de son père, pour tenter sa chance au nord. Les conflits qui ont toujours existé entre lui et son père, sont résolus quand Bonfillio fait ses adieux. Lucia, la prostituée et Demetrio le fossoyeur, se retrouvent la nuit quand l'amour ne peut s'accomplir que lors de l'enterrement de Lucia par Demetrio. Don Julin, un propriétaire terrien, est rongé par ses remords, après le départ de Cleotilde avec laquelle il s'est marié en défiant les convenances.

Astra 28.2°E odd channel

There's an oddly titled channel amongst the free-to-air channels on asta 28.2E. It is called "coi tobacco dal". What a strange name! Nothing but rubbish on it, but what is it? A google search merely brings up listings of channels. Fribbler (talk) 23:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What channel is it on? DuncanHill (talk) 04:59, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 13

anti-drug videos

why is it that anti drug videos over exagerate so much? can't they just tell the straight truth? ps.there hillarious though!

The truth about anything is usually pretty boring. Adam Bishop (talk) 20:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is the way that most teenagers connect with the world, psychologically speaking. Most drugs are not harmful in the short term; but are devastating if used for long enough. Heroin, Meth, cocaine, etc. all do some pretty nasty stuff if taken for years and years; and they're also all fairly addictive. However, a single use of any one of these drugs is unlikely to be very damaging. And that is the crux of the problem when trying to get teenagers to understand the dangers of hard drugs; psychologically teenagers don't often think in terms of "twenty years down the road"... They live in the here and now. Show them a picture of a 20-year heroin user, and they cannot identify with that. So it is unlikely to affect them in any way; seeing what someone's life is like after 20 years of heroin use, and most teenagers feel nothing about that. To relate to teenagers, you need relate to them in ways that affect them NOW. So advertising has to focus on what drugs can do to teenagers NOW, and thus have to exagerate the short-term effects of hard drugs. Which is not to say that hard drugs are harmless; their addictive nature means that an often cavalier attitude towards hard drugs in the short term can lead to long term addiction, the effects of which aren't noticable until its too late to do anything about it... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I remember seeing a more realistic anti-dope video along the lines of "we got stoned, no-one died, no-one started a fight, we just sat around" - then the actor saying that he wasn't doing the same tonight as he'd decided it was more fun to get out there and do something exciting. Exxolon (talk) 05:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I did particularly like that one... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:40, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Exaggeration ? Are you telling me that "Reefer Madness" isn't a totally factual documentary ? StuRat (talk) 06:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, of course not. But even with weed, some people have a particular sensitivity to it, and find themselves in hospital with a truly horrible psychotic episode after smoking a small amount that most other users would take in their stride. There's no way to know whether a first-time user will find themselves in this situation or not until they do it. OR prevents me from revealing my evidence, but I know whereof I speak. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it happened to me one I went to see fantomas and the melvins and got so high I lost three days and was freakin the hell out bithing the heads off rats s Wochende (talk) 17:51, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 14

Shirley Temple

Why is there such a gap between the acclaim and love of the Depression-era and a modern "hatedom" represented by people cheering when she's eaten by King Kong in the Simpsons. Paul Austin (talk) 00:54, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware anyone really hated Shirley Temple. I always thought she was a fairly competant diplomat for the U.S. Represented our interests well abroad. Do people really feel that strongly about her? I would read too much into an obtuse reference in a Simpsons episode either... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say any overexposed celebrity causes people to eventually get sick of them, especially if they're typecast, as Shirley Temple was (I'd have liked to see her in a movie like "The Bad Seed", to change her image). Shirley wasn't able to make it as an adult actress, partially because of this. StuRat (talk) 06:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's often a gap between popular opinion and that of the knowing ironic over-educated types who write for The Simpsons; they make jokes about lots of more recent celebrities, and the show probably reflects the writers' attitude more than perceptions of public mood (if you showed someone genuinely hated, like Adolf Hitler or Leni Riefenstahl or Myra Hindley it wouldn't be so funny or transgressive). Even in Temple's heyday as a star, some cynical intellectual types like Graham Greene were very rude about her[9].
The biggest celebrities of bygone days don't often keep their luster (erstwhile screen hunks like Rudolph Valentino, Alan Ladd, and Victor Mature are today variously ignored or mocked - all most people now know about Ladd is him standing on a box), and even stars who keep their fame like Frank Sinatra are fair game for the Simpsons (in fairness, Temple probably never had links to organized crime). People are particularly suspicious of old-style child stars and children dolled up in glamorous fashion following things like theJonBenet Ramsay murder and tragic Hollywood life stories like that of Judy Garland.
Furthermore, Temple films such as Reconstruction-era drama The Littlest Rebel may be viewed as racist or at least politically dubious by people today. So it would be surprising if Temple got much respect from the show's makers; she should be glad to have been mentioned at all. (I recall that at one point the young Montgomery Burns appeared with blonde curls looking surprisingly like Temple.) --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 13:08, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I believe young Burns had the Little Lord Fauntleroy look, as in this pic: [10]. StuRat (talk) 15:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need help searching LexisNexis for Milo and Otis references

Back when I had access to LexisNexis I was able to find references to animal cruelty allegations against Milo and Otis:

  1. ^ Hobart Mercury; September 18, 1990.
  2. ^ The Sunday Mail (Brisbane); April 15, 1990

I need the titles and authors of these articles -- can anyone help?--The lorax (talk) 02:15, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but if you post your request on the Resource Request page someone should be able to help you. --Richardrj talk email 08:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for songs for a "fashion" mix CD

Hey all! I am prone to assembling mixes for my own and others' amusement and currently I'm trying to put together a collection of songs in a "matter of appearances" theme. Songs about clothing, jewelry, makeup, hairstyles, and other aesthetic matters. Here's a sampling of what I have so far:

Thanks for any suggestions you can offer! Esoteric, mainstream, songbook stuff, whatever you can think of! Poechalkdust (talk) 13:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pepso2 (talk) 13:51, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
--Shantavira|feed me 13:57, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
--Bus stop (talk) 14:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
--DuncanHill (talk) 14:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
--Bus stop (talk) 15:49, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Puttin' On the Ritz"
—Tamfang (talk) 22:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't seen any heavy metal yet, so let me nominate Hell Bent for Leather by Judas Priest. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:38, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And, to get as far from heavy metal as possible, Raspberry Beret by Mr. Nelson. You know, the kind you find in a second hand store?--Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Killers – Bling 2006
Paul Simon – Diamonds on the Soles of Her Shoes
speaking of the Hollies, Long Cool Woman in a Black Dress Julia Rossi (talk) 07:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two numbers from the Great American Songbook, for old time's sake:

---Sluzzelin talk 09:18, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(could be the title here, even) Julia Rossi (talk) 09:36, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For bikinis, there are "Itsy Bitsy Teenie Weenie Yellow Polka Dot Bikini", and maybe "Rebel Girl" by Bikini Kill. But Gogol Bordello's fashion tip is "Start Wearing Purple" ("... for me now. All your sanity and wits they will all vanish, I promise, it's just a matter of time") ---Sluzzelin talk 09:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another Bikini song: The Cramps - Bikini Girls With Machine Guns --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:11, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---Sluzzelin talk 13:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Depeche Mode, "Dressed in Black" and "New Dress", both on the Black Celebration album. --LarryMac | Talk 13:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Back in Black, by ACDC of course. DuncanHill (talk) 13:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Red Dress" by Alvin Stardust "Ride a White Swan" by T Rex (wear a tall hat like a druid in the old days/wear a tall hat and a tattooed gown) "I'm Too Sexy" by Right Said Fred ("I'm too sexy for my shirt" - and my god he is too!) --TammyMoet (talk) 18:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Single Ladies

Hello, does anybody know the names or stage names of the two Ladies (especially to Beyoncé's left hand side) next to Beyoncé in her Video "Single Ladies"? – http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=5N-T3CG0SOY – Thank you, Doc Taxon (talk) 14:19, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Clone Wars

I missed Star Wars: Clone Wars on friday. Can anybody tell me when Cartoon Network will show the episode on it's site? I know it's on again tonight but so is the last episode of Survivor: Gabon and I want to watch that too.--Pufferfish4 (talk) 19:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The episodes usually appear a few hours after broadcast, though episode 10 doesn't appear to have been added. You can watch it here on supernovatube or maybe find a torrent. SN0WKITT3N 13:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 15

Question about Terminators

Are Terminators supposed to be anatomically correct and fully functional? I've only recently started watching The Sarah Connor Chronicles and there has been a couple of scenes where the Terminatrix, Cameron (Terminator) has been dropping heavily suggestive hints to John Connor. Could a human actually 'do it' with a Terminator? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.92.203 (talk) 01:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Being fiction, I suppose the writers could do whatever they wanted. If it made more people watch the show, the writers are bound to do anything they want...--Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The T-800 apparently looked anatomically impressive on the outside, judging from the lady bikers' expressions in Terminator 2. Otherwise I would have to agree with Jayron - if you can believe that a time-travelling robot can look like Cameron, why not believe that John can have sex with it? Adam Bishop (talk) 08:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This has been the subject of much debate on the forums and discussion boards, and while the writers of TTSCC have not confirmed either way, most of the evidence suggests she is anatomically correct. When Cameron approaches the guys in the pilot episode she is fully naked and if she wasn't anatomically correct their reactions would have been a lot different from what they were. Also, as Adam Bishop said above, in T2 it is conveyed to the viewer that Arnie's Terminator is all there by the expression on the waitress's face when she sees him naked; but whether he is "fully functional" is a different matter. Also remember that Terminators are not only designed for combat but also for long term infiltration, so being anatomically correct would greatly aid in posing as human. In the episode Vick's Chip they hack into a T-888's chip to learn about it's mission, and discover that he was in a relationship as part of his cover. It is heavily implied that he was fully functional and that he was able to pose as the husband of a woman who was believed to have contributed to Skynet. Additionally, if Skynet has gone to the trouble of creating Terminators which are specifically designed to be and act female (skin, hair, facial features, ect) then it would seem plausible that it went all the way in designing them. As for if they would actually "do it", it looks like a relationship is possible as they both have showed at some interest ("I'm good now, I don't wanna go! I'm sorry, that wasn't me, I'm fix now I ran a test! Everything's perfect you can trust me! I love you! I love you please, I love you John and you love me"). Also, they always give each other those looks and it seems as if Cameron is jealous of Riley. Even Sarah has noticed this, saying to Cameron "I don't like the way he responds to you". I suppose the only things standing in their way is the stigma of dating a robot (Futurama: "Don't date robots!"), Sarah Connor's obvious disapproval and the fact that Cameron is posing as John's sister so there is that eww factor from onlookers who are unaware of the real situation. SN0WKITT3N 12:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Probably. It'd be a good way to kill someone, lure them into sex and then kill them while they are...um...entranced.  Buffered Input Output 17:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Except that if a Terminator got that close to someone who it was supposed to kill, what would be purpose of having sex before it broke your neck? SN0WKITT3N 18:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Because the punters might want to see that? Because casual sex often equals death in this area of storytelling? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
From my occasional browsings of the TTSCC forums, it would seem that at least half the people that watch the show only watch it because they want to see a torrid John and Cameron romance. Or simply because they want to see John voiding Cameron's manufacturer's warranty (or whatever humorous euphemism for man/fem-bot sex you choose). The writers would annoy a heck of a lot of fans if they didn't write her as being 'anatomically correct and fully functional' - though I doubt we'll see them actually doing anything until the end of the series. Shows have a habit of going seriously downhill when the unresolved sexual tension is resolved. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:18, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the whole Cameron and John romance is extremely delicate and awkward. I wish she'd gone to the prom with Morris. SN0WKITT3N 18:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

German language film: devotion

I am looking for information on agerman lnguage film called devotion. The film primarily stars 2 characters who have sex and continually play games with each other —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.19.237 (talk) 07:36, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An IMDB search on that title draws a blank, as does a search for possible German-language equivalents. Are you sure about that title, and do you have any more information about the film? --Richardrj talk email 08:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Matthias Glasner's 2005 film Free Will ((Der freie Wille)[11] seems much darker than your description. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:08, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Devot[12]? The word is German BDSM slang for a submissive (German Wikipedia). --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 13:16, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pride & Prejudice

Can someone please name all the actresses that appear in this poster of the 2005 film adaptation of Pride & Prejudice? David Pro (talk) 15:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From left to right: Jena Malone, Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley, Rosamund Pike, Talulah Riley (I think) ---Sluzzelin talk 15:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I dream of Keira, nightly. StuRat (talk) 21:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Little too skinny, but she's all right. bibliomaniac15 04:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chipmunks/Beatles sales records

In 1958 the Chipmunk Christmas Song (Christmas Don't be Late) was the #1 seller of all time, with 4.5 million records sold. I undrestand that the Beatles beat tehm out in about 1963. What Beatles song out-sold Christmas Don't be Late?12.31.231.168 (talk) 16:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about sales in the USA or elsewhere? List of best-selling singles in the United States gives Hey Jude as the only Beatles track to sell more than 4 million, but it was released in 1968. The list doesn't mention the Chipmunks, but their single may be too old.
List of best-selling singles worldwide gives The Chipmunk Song (Christmas Don't Be Late) at 5.5 million in 1958, and for the Beatles I Want to Hold Your Hand (1964) at 12 million and Can't Buy Me Love (1964) at 6 million; I Want To Hold Your Hand was released first, and so presumably would have outsold the Chipmunks first. However sales figures from that long ago are likely to be very inaccurate and to miss out sales in many markets. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 17:28, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beecham Messiah (1927) and the BBC Choir and Symphony Orchestra

Hi, I recently acquired a copy of the 1993 Pearl re-mastering of Sir Thomas Beecham’s late 1927 recording of Handel’s Messiah (http://www.amazon.com/Handel-Messiah/dp/B000000WVM). According to the artist notes given by Pearl, the recording includes “The British Broadcasting Corporation Choir” and “Symphony Orchestra”. I took this attribution for granted; however, since then, I have learned by chance that the BBC Symphony Orchestra did not come into existence until 1930 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/orchestras/symphonyorchestra/about_us/history.shtml) (I am not sure about the ‘BBC Choir’ – but the Symphony Chorus apparently began in 1928 http://www.bbc.co.uk/orchestras/symphonyorchestra/symphonychorus/history.shtml). I have been looking online, but the only attributions I can find given of the orchestra and chorus used in the 1927 recording are those given by amazon and other music sites selling the Pearl transfer which follow the pearl issue by citing the BBC Choir/Chorus and SO.

What I would like to know, then, if anyone can tell me, is this: what orchestra and chorus are featured in the 1927 Beecham recording of the Messiah? Is it the BBC SO and Chorus (and if so, how? Were they, for example, a part-time organisation before 1930?)? Or is it a different set of musicians, e.g. the London Phil (who were Beecham’s orchestra at the time) or the LSO (with whom he performed Messiah the previous year)?

144.32.157.60 (talk) 17:40, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Monica (Friends)

How did Monica lose SO MUCH weight? It doesn't mention on the article on Monica. Thanks :) 122.162.175.73 (talk) 19:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By taking off the fat suit. You do know it's a fictional show, and therefore any answer isn't going to help anyone else lose weight? DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:33, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I know that. I just think their must be some plausible explanation offered for such an extreme transformation. 122.162.175.73 (talk) 19:44, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the show it was a comment by Chandler calling her Ross's "fat sister" that finally gave her the resolve to lose weight. I would guess diet and exercise —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.88.87 (talk) 19:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's the big deal with whistling in an elevator?

In the play, Death of a Salesman, they seem to make a big deal about not whistling in an elevator. What's the big deal? 216.239.234.196 (talk) 20:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever I hear a man whistling in the elevator, I'm afraid he's going to pee there. StuRat (talk) 21:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Being a confined space, elevators by their nature cause all people to intrude on each other's personal space. People don't feel comfortable thinking about that, and so do their best to "ignore" the other people. Whistling destroys the illusion that you are alone on the elevator, and therefore makes others uncomfortable... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Talking would also destroy that illusion, but there seems to be no general taboo on talking in an elevator, even if most people pretend there's nobody else there to talk to. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't that long ago that I saw a study that found people could tune out conversations between multiple people performed at half the volume of a single person talking on a phone. This leads me to believe that people may be able to tune out conversations when all people involved are in the elevator, but not when the person talking is on a phone. -- kainaw™ 23:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It should also be noted that social mores have changed dramatically between the time period in Death of a Salesman and today... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whistling (humming, singing, talking to yourself) in an elevator is noise for the sake of noise; it is intrusive and essentially dismissive of anyone else on the elevator. Talking to another person also on the elevator is somewhat less dismissive, as it includes at least the one other person, but it still creates an "us and them" in a very confined space. Taking a telephone call is in the same league. All of it is basically selfish behaviour and inconsiderate of others who are forced to share your space, voice and thoughts. Unless you know everyone on the elevator, you are best advised to keep your music and your thoughts to yourself. (How's that for a "bah! humbug" response?) ៛ Bielle (talk) 04:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm gonna agree with Bielle on this; its a lot like talking to a guy at the next urinal. Do some people do it? Yeah. But should you. Hell no... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that depends ... no, I'd better not go there. :) But seriously, would anyone already in a lift (so much shorter to write than elevator) object if the doors opened and in walked 2 or more people engaged in conversation, who continued to talk after the doors close again? It certainly wouldn't bother me. Two people who commenced a conversation after they were already inside might be a little different, but again, it wouldn't bother me as long as they spoke quietly and didn't overwhelm the whole carriage with their talk. That in itself seems to be a growing problem these days, since the advent of mobiles, and we see all sorts of commentary and complaints about people who feel the need to include the whole world in their mobile conversations. That can happen anywhere, and does, but I agree it's especially annoying in a confined space like a lift or a train. By the way, has it become socially acceptable to rip their mobile from their hand, fling it to the ground, stomp it to smithereens, and shout in their face "SHUT THE F***K UP!!!!!" - and if not, when will that happy day arrive? -- JackofOz (talk) 05:49, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(after ec) This discussion may be enlightening. Grutness...wha? 05:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to Jack, I actually prefer two people engaged in their conversation to one or more silent companions in an elevator. The talkers make it easier for me not to "be there", while the confined intimacy of shared silence (occasionally broken by throat-clearing, gulping, and other bodily sounds) makes me feel more uncomfortable. Whenever possible, I take the stairs (stairwells often have great acoustics for whistling too). ---Sluzzelin talk 06:32, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I love whistling and whistle anywhere. And when I come across someone whistling in a shopping centre or street, I like to think there goes another whistler. We're a rare and uninhibited breed. On the question though, in Death of a Salesman ("Bob Harrison said you were tops, and then you go and do some damn fool thing like whistling whole songs in the elevator like a comedian") the drift is that it's déclassé or immature to whistle at work or in public, so it's a personal criticism. At this site[13] newsroom people discss a supersition about whistling in their particular workplace. Julia Rossi (talk) 07:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whistling#Whistling_and_superstition also mentions superstition about whistling indoors in certain Eastern European cultures. My host in Budapest was confronted by his 80-year old neighbour who wanted to know why the foolish stranger insisted on whistling in the stairwell. I've been more self-conscious about whistling ever since. While we're at it, another whistling phenomenon that has fascinated me since I can remember, is that it can be subconsciously contagious, like yawning. When you're whistling, often someone else nearby will start whistling their own unrelated tune, without noticing the clash of the melodies. ---Sluzzelin talk 08:07, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
<whistles pitch-bend up with downward glissando> Mind boggling. Julia Rossi (talk) 10:16, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've never known it to be contagious. But, my experience with it was a few years of constantly whistling the theme to the Smurfs while I was in the Marines - specifically to annoy everyone else. Nobody else started whistling along with me. I just remembered another note on whistling... The Smothers Brothers had a skit that talked about whistling the dirty words to songs as a kid because they weren't allowed to sing them. So, if you hear some kid whistling a song, give him a good whack because he probably thinking of dirty words. -- kainaw™ 13:36, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the deal with whistling stems from the fact that, like with playing the violin, you're either good at it or horrible. When an "amateur" whistler starts hitting the upper registers you can get a fingernails on chalkboard sort of resonance happening. I have no problem with two people carrying their conversation on in an elevator (with me also on board), though I'd be annoyed by a whistler going on in a confined space; it's easy to get a feedback pattern in there with all those flat hard walls. It would be like someone singing to themselves in my immediate personal space: a strong "shut-out" signal combined with an auditory assault. Matt Deres (talk) 14:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 16

Comparing boxing and wrestling

Why is it that professional boxers generally only have one or two fights a year, when professional wrestlers seem to be able to fight every couple of weeks? --81.76.54.220 (talk) 01:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because boxers are actually beating each other's heads in, and wrestlers are not. Adam Bishop (talk) 02:36, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To expand on what Adam Bishop has noted; in professional boxing, the outcome is not predetermined(well, not SUPPOSED to be) and the boxers are really trying to win by beating the other guy senseless. This, even for the winners, can take a terrible toll on the body, and professional boxers at the highest levels often do need months to recover from a fight. Professional wrestling is basically soap-opera. While the exhibition is physically demanding, the outcome is pre-determined and the wrestlers are play-fighting according to a script. This is a physically demanding venture, but no more so than say, a football game would be, and as such professional wrestlers have a much shorter turn-around time between matches. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:51, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's much much more simple than that: Money. The top boxers need to limit supply to increase demand. Amateur boxers and other combat-sports competitors can take part in fights at least monthly. As our Nigel Benn article notes he won 22 fights from 1987 to 1989. His record (http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=739&cat=boxer) shows 12 fights in 1987 alone. The reason is not so much physical, as it is financial. The biggest fights need to occur reasonably infrequently to maximise demand, and thus increase revenue per fight. If you look through the records of professional boxers they'll doubtlessly show a similar theme - more fights in the early professional years and less as they get higher up the 'ranks'. I'm sure fatigue from the fight plays a part but realistically all the other fighters manage so it must be (primarily) a monetary reason. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That does seem to play somewhat of a role as well, but also consider that early fights tend to be short (3 round) fights, while at the highest levels, championship fights can go on as long as 12 rounds. Thus, as their careers progress, the fights also become more physically demanding. Its likely some combination of the two. While a championship fighter could likely fight more than twice a year, boxing a 12 round fight every month may be excessive... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wrestling matches also don't last as long as a normal boxing match. In professional MMA, the bouts are indeed spread out to help increase the demand per fighter's appearance. They can, and do, fight on much shorter intervals when the opportunity arises. But MMA fights are in many ways less brutal than a boxing match; the ref is more likely to stop a fight for the health of a fighter and the fact you can fight all-out makes it easier to end a fight quickly, both in the sense that a knee to the head can end a fight in one shot and in the sense that the lesser athlete will gas themselves much more quickly and so get taken out. Boxing seems designed to drag out each fight, perhaps to help compensate for the fact each man only fights once or twice a year. Wrestling combines the all-out style of MMA without the fear of serious personal injury (well, less fear; accidents happen). Five minutes of posing for the droolers, five minutes of play-fighting, and five minutes of theatrics offstage; that's not exactly a punishing schedule for someone in good physical shape. Matt Deres (talk) 14:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Silent Night, Holy Night in a film

I seem to remember a film which has a part where kids run downstairs in slow motion to open their presents while this song plays. Anyone have any idea what I'm talking about? I may be wrong on the details a bit, but I think it's something like this. Oh, and it might be a very obvious film, just something that has slipped my mind. Thanks. 68.50.107.144 (talk) 01:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conway's Game of Life

Moved to Computing Reference Desk: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing#Conway's Game of Life. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:59, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GTA 4 Theme Song

What is the song played in the first GTA 4 trailer?Neon6419 (talk) 12:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arm in Arm by The Boggs. SN0WKITT3N 17:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Girl in the 2008 VGA's

Does anybody know the name of the girl that was dressed all in white and had black hair in the 2008 VGA's? She was in the commercials(moving around those panels like it was a touch screen) and showing the catagories for what award was being presented (on the touch screen).Neon6419 (talk) 12:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

texan lesbian prostitutes

i have heard of a film about texan lesbian prostitutes and apparently there is a scene which is artily shot. she has a dildo in her ass and is tapping it on a mirror but it is filmed in the mirror. what is this film called? Wochende (talk) 16:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find any mainstream movies with this in, could be wrong but this sounds like a standard porn movie. Google it and you'll get loads of results. SN0WKITT3N 17:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Entertainment&oldid=258392250"