Welcome to the entertainment section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

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.

May 27

seeking Shchedryk sheet

Where do people look for written scores these days, preferably open-source & academic types instead of sketchy sites and annoying apps? I would love a Carol of the Bells in four voices. Temerarius (talk) 02:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Temerarius: Try IMSLP for public-domain works. Unfortunately, the English lyrics are still under copyright, so the scores only have lyrics in Ukrainian (as well as Italian and Spanish translations by respective editors who released them under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Double sharp (talk) 08:08, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much @Double sharp! Temerarius (talk) 21:36, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shams al-Ma'arif as a model for the Necronomicon?

Could it be that Lovecraft used the book "Shams al-Ma'arif" as a model for his fictional book Necronomicon? 2A02:8071:60A0:92E0:0:0:0:992A (talk) 14:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that he had heard of it, but as the first English translations appeared in 2022, and I'm fairly sure that Lovecraft could not read Arabic (or Urdu or Turkish, into which it has also been translated), he would likely not have known it in detail.

In his Lovecraft: A Biography (New York, Doubleday, 1975), L.Sprague de Camp states (p167) that "The name [Necronomicon] was probably suggested by the Astronomica of Manilius . . . quoted by Lovecraft in his newspaper columns." De Camp goes on to cite a number of real, legendary and fictional books that Lovecraft mentioned in prose and correspondence, but Shams al-Ma'arif is not amongst them.

Those real books include William Scott-Elliot's The Story of Atlantis (1896) and The Lost Lemuria (1904), Joseph Glanvil's [sic] Sadducismus Triumphatus (1668, published 1681), The ancient Egyptian Book of Thoth, and Helena Blavatsky's The Book of Dzyan (plagiarised from Sanscrit texts).

Of course, Lovecraft was a voluminous correspondent, and it's possible that references to Shams al-Ma'arif have turned up in papers of his studied since 1975. I can certainly see why you make the suggestion.

One further possibility: Lovecraft was an avid fan of The One Thousand and One Nights from early childhood, and in two separate letters recounted that he adopted the pseudonym of Abdul Alhazred around the age of five (see Lin Carter Lovecraft: A Look Behind the Cthulhu Mythos (New York, Ballantine Books, 1972, Chapter 1)). Having access to his maternal grandfather's "voluminous" library, he probably read an adult rather than child's version, so if Shams al-Ma'arif is mentioned, he would have learned of its existence thus. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.173 (talk) 20:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Other potential sources of inspiration are the Picatrix and the Kitāb al-nawāmīs, of which the text was accessible. --Lambiam 09:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 28

Violating the suspension of disbelief

I'm curious at what point writers and filmmakers say "that won't work" or "we can't do it that way" to allow the suspension of disbelief to function. I just watched The Killer (2023), and the only problem I had with the entire film was when The Killer travels to Florida to take out "The Brute" who tried to kill him in his absence and beat his girlfriend instead. This scene makes no sense to me, and I'm surprised the writers and the filmmakers wrote and shot it this way. What's even stranger to me is that fans are saying its the best part of the film. I don't get it, as I see it as the worst scene of the entire production. The Killer is much smaller than The Brute, doesn't know the layout of his place, and yet manages to take out this guy in his own home because The Brute has a limp. The Brute has the upper hand in almost ever aspect of the fight, yet The Killer somehow manages to kill the guy. What is the calculus the writer and director use here? It doesn't work for me at all, yet the fans seem to dig it simply because of the extended, gratuitous fight scene, a fight that makes no sense at all, and in reality, The Killer should have lost. Viriditas (talk) 21:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have clearly not yet suspended your disbelief. As this was a requirement incumbent upon you as a consumer of this production, you have failed to uphold your end of the deal, and the producers are entitled to sue you for breach of contract. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, at least in something like The Matrix, we are allowed to suspend disbelief because the characters can get away with whatever they want in the computer simulated world (but the consequences remain just as deadly). I just did a marathon rewatch of all The Matrix films, and this idea was executed flawlessly (although I quibble with the notion of free will and determinism that is implicit in the story, as it it's quite confusing for the audience). But I don't see that happening at a scriptural level in the writing with The Killer. Why am I supposed to believe that The Killer, who is clearly suffering from sleep deprivation and anxiety, is able to defeat another killer who is twice his size and is fighting on his home turf? It doesn't work for me, but yet, it seems to work for others. My question is why do most people accept this? Viriditas (talk) 22:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The hero prevails against seemingly impossible odds. It's a very old device. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:03, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Vintage Hollywood westerns have the bad guys firing off hundreds of rounds without hitting anything, but the good guy can hit a man hiding behind a rock 200 yards away with one shot from his revolver. Alansplodge (talk) 11:01, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or going further back, in a one battle, King Arthur managed to kill 470 Saxons with his own sword and emerge unscathed. [1] Alansplodge (talk) 11:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, nothing so moderate. Geoffrey of Monmouth reduced that figure from the 960 men he found in his source, or more likely the numeral D (500) got left out and an extra X got added somewhere in the manuscript transmission. Roman numerals normally seem to get corrupted in that sort of way after a chain of tired monks have copied them. --Antiquary (talk) 12:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now that you mention it, I wonder if the limp of The Brute was a mythological reference to the Achilles' heel. Viriditas (talk) 23:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See our article on overthinking :-) Alansplodge (talk) 10:58, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I watched The Matrix I couldn't believe that humans work as electric generators. The bullet time and such effects were good but it seemed a big plot hole. I didn't watch the following sequels. --Error (talk) 01:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't a documentary. It was entertainment. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, entertainment that jolts the viewers out of their suspension of disbelief by an obvious absurdity is not well written. I too noticed this at the time, thought it silly, and have not bothered to watch the sequels.

I have a theory that makers of Hollywood-level 'Sci-Fi' films (and TV) have read Science Fiction in their teens, when it was less well developed as a literary form, but not subsequently because they were too busy with their general careers: consequently, when they come to make science-fiction films, they model them on the older, inferior standards they remember. If their competitors are doing the same, they all form a 'bubble of unsophistication'. To my perception (as an aged written SF & Fantasy fan), film and TV SF&F usually (though not invariably) lag a few decades behind the written forms in quality of (screen)writing. This even applies to many film versions of literarily successful novels and stories, which get unnecessarily 'disimproved' by screenwriters who overestimate their own abilities. [/rant]. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.173 (talk) 12:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could well be. And I recall Siskel and Ebert talking about what they called the "idiot plot", in which the premise is so absurd that the audience can't fully buy into it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:43, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've never read a word of Agatha Christie's novels, but I'm told the resolution often depends on some information that no reader could possibly have anticipated from the foregoing plot, and which is revealed only by the detective (Poirot, Marple, whomever) at the end. Yet Christie is the best-selling fiction writer of all time, her novels having sold more than two billion copies, so readers show no sign of having been put off by her approach. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was also the deal with the old "Perry Mason" TV series. There was no way to figure it out. So you could turn the show on during the last 5 minutes and still get the full gist of it. This is in contrast to modern TV cop shows, where the perp often turns out to be someone who briefly appeared on-screen early in the show. So then the guessing game becomes, which early character will it turn out to be. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My ex proposed the rule of "murder by most famous": the villain is the juiciest part, so it commonly goes to the most prominent guest actor. —Tamfang (talk) 19:13, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Although it's a few decades since I read (quite a few of) Christie's novels, this is not how I remember them. As I recall, they sometimes hinged on fairly obscure knowledge, but never produced anything 'out of thin air': there was always some deliberately unemphasised clue to the mystery earlier in the story, so that when the answer was revealed one was annoyed for not having spotted it.

Christie was a prominent member of the Detection Club, whose (loosely adhered-to) principles discouraged impossible-to-guess solutions. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.173 (talk) 01:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have been misinformed. It was them wot dun it, m'lud. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience "idiot plot" usually means a plot that requires the protagonist to do something implausibly foolish. —Tamfang (talk) 19:13, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the battery thing was ridiculous, but Lana Wachowski cleared this up a while ago, saying the original story didn't use humans as batteries, they were used as a kind of neural network or CPU, but the bean counters in suits didn't understand it and asked the Wachowskis to change it to batteries, which of course makes no sense. Viriditas (talk) 02:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That premise is almost as absurd. Could you imagine the performance of someone like Trump or his MAGA supporters? One flop per day, tops. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the processors, it's the malware. —Tamfang (talk) 19:14, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A related concept to the OP's query is Jumping the shark. Alansplodge (talk) 16:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 1

Ø (Disambiguation)

Why was Ø (Disambiguation) given that title? Did the creators want to parody Wikipedia, or what? Nyttend (talk) 04:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We do have an article with the title "Ø (disambiguation)". Maybe the album's title was intended as an homage. Note that the band styled its name as UNDERØATH on an earlier album. --Lambiam 12:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion of this question at Talk:Ø_(Disambiguation)#Was_this_album_based_on_the_title_of_a_Wikipedia_disambiguation_page?. --Wrongfilter (talk) 12:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 6

The video to James The King Brown's version of Whole Lotta Rosie

James "The King" Brown came up with a great version of AC/DC's "Whole Lotta Rosie" sung in the style of Elvis Presley. Its video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuBAqCBFNF8) is also among the best music videos I've seen. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find any information about it (director, actors, location, synopsis, etc.).

Can any of you search engine wizzards do better? Not difficult since I've achieved about nothing.

In particular I'd like to know:

1. Who is the actress who plays the blonde woman?

2. Who/what is she supposed to be?

3. What's the underlying story? For example: Is the singer, James "The King" Brown, trying to pick her up, at the beginning of the video? Is she supposed to be as huge as the original Rosie? She looks more or less normal to me. Why isn't she happy when he asks the guitar player "Do you know Whole Lotta Rosie?"

4. What location was the video filmed in?

5. Who directed the video? 178.51.21.181 (talk) 09:35, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Londonbeat's I've Been Thinking About You

Does anyone know or can anyone find out who the model/actress who plays the "Cowgirl" in Londonbeat's original video to their song "I've Been Thinking About You" 178.51.21.181 (talk) 09:42, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Square colors on checkerboards

We know that a checkerboard has squares of 2 colors. But in chess we call them black and white; in checkers we call them black and red. Why this inconsistency?? Georgia guy (talk) 17:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The boards can have various colors. [As illustrated in Checkerboard and Chessboard.] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note also the long-standing red-and-white "checkerboard" logo of Ralston Purina. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure? Here I read: "The most commonly used colors of the board are green and buff with dark squares. The colors of the pieces shall be of color contrast. Most used in tournament play are red for the dark and white for the light pieces." Elsewhere I see "a board of 64 squares (8x8) alternately colored white and black". And, "Most often these boards are black and red or black and white, though you can find custom boards made out of a vast array of colors and patterns." – which is not about how they are called, but about the actual colours. The European Draughts Confederation describes a checkerboard as "a board with alternating light and dark squares". In international draughts, played on a 10×10 board, the squares are typically also called black and white, regardless of their actual colours – just as in chess, where the "white" squares may be wheat while the "black" squares are chocolate. --Lambiam 19:14, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on Checkers mentions the color red twice. In both cases it's a description of the pieces on the board, not the squares. So your claim that "in checkers we call them black and red" doesn't seem true. That article also contains a lot of photos of boards. None of them have red squares. HiLo48 (talk) 00:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 7

Isekai works wanted

Hello,

I'd like to hear (recommendations) about "reverse" Isekai titles with a decent critical or commercial success published as light novels or manga. By "reverse", I mean stories where a character doesn't travel to a foreign world, but a foreign individual comes to our Earth. Does anybody know about stories that are similar in their setting to e.g. All My Neighbors are Convinced the Female Knight from My Rice Field Is My Wife (this is a Kodansha title), Welcome to Japan, Ms. Elf! or to the launching point of the story of Gate (novel series) with its invasion of Japan by fantasy creatures through the eponymous gate? Too much gore or too much leaning into high fantasy is not really my thing, I'd rather have a kind of "toned down", more "realistical" setting (e.g. like Mushoku Tensei, Another World Survival: Min-maxing My Support and Summoning Magic, Death March to the Parallel World Rhapsody, IseSuma, Outbreak Company, Record of Wortenia War or Kuro no senki - these examples are stories that I like). If somebody have clues or pointers for me, I'd be glad to hear about these - with regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 00:19, 7 June 2024 (UTC) PS. Please use a ping to notify me about answers, I may not see them in time otherwise as my home Wiki is the German one.[reply]

Sword of the Highlands

I have just seen this fan-made video on Youtube. The song is "Sword of the Highlands" by Manowar, but which is the film or series where the action is taken from? Cambalachero (talk) 15:05, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A comment below the video mentions Vikings (TV series). -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 15:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]