Entertainment desk
< July 21	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 23 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 22

Games on Demand vs On Disc

I was about to buy some old xbox 360 games I missed on and I was wondering something. I generally prefer having the disc compared to downloading a game on demand, but I was wondering would there be any difference in quality and/or load time if I purchase the game online, buy the disc and use that, or buy the disc and install the game. Any advice would be appreciated, thanks. 108.3.234.42 (talk) 01:03, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There should be no difference. There's a difference to the publisher (and developer, if they are earning royalties): If you buy a used disc, they don't get any money, whereas if you buy the game online on Xbox Marketplace, they do. Comet Tuttle (talk) 14:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the question I asked, at all. You're talking about money the people get, I'm talking about loading times, and I never mentioned buying a used game, I hate that. 75.131.169.89 (talk) 22:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rome (HBO Series): What do the priests at Caesar's body chant?

In the episode Passover (Rome), Caesar's body is laying on a bier with Calpurnia and some priestesses around. When Servilia visits, you hear the priests chanting something, I believe it is in latin but I don't understand much except "usque" or "utque" and maybe "patre et matre". Is the full text available somewhere? Could it be an actual historical roman death chant? --212.227.35.78 (talk) 07:00, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You could try Roman Dirge. μηδείς (talk) 22:00, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Single without a release date

Demi Lovato's song "Don't Forget" was released as a single, but not digitally or physically, so that would mean that it was only released to radio, and since she was at Disney back then, it was presumably only sent to Radio Disney. I've searched trough Radio and Records, Allaccess and FMQB for add dates for this song, but I've found nothing and Radio Disney hasn't got an archive for radio adds. All I know is that it was released in March or April 2009. Her label, Hollywood Records, doesn't list releases on their website and they don't have an email. So my question is if somebody has connections at Hollywood or Radio Disney? In that case, could you please ask them about this? I need a release date, format (digital, physical or radio) and publisher ID. Pancake (talk) 13:53, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Allmusic doesn't list it as a single. There's nothing to say that it was ever released as a single. Radio Disney could have just played the album track. Not every song on the radio is on Officially Released Single. --Jayron32 20:12, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kesha's Take It Off isn't listed at Allmusic either but it was a single. It was also only released to radio. Billboard supports the fact that Don't Forget was released. Pancake (talk) 20:56, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Released" usually means there is some physical media with a catalog number, or at the least some downloadable file availible from the publisher or artist. How does Billboard support that it was "released"? --Jayron32 21:08, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a song that is sent to radio is a single, it doesn't have be released digitally or physically. Billboard reviewed the song in their April 25, 2009 issue under Billboard reviews singles. The long discussion at Talk:Like a Surgeon (Ciara song) came to conclusion that a review by Billboard, where it is clearly referred to as a single, supports that it is. Disney also called it a single. Pancake (talk) 22:07, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ballpark at Girard Avenue and Parkside Avenue?

There's a Library of Congress image here, of what the LOC says is a ballpark in Philadelphia used mostly by the Negro Leagues. It says it is/was located at Girard Ave. and Parkside Ave., but I can't find any ballparks online that were at that location. Does anyone know which ballpark that is? Delaywaves ^talk ^• ^contribs 14:48, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. The Philadelphia Stars appear to have played at 44th and Parkside Ballpark, and 44th St is now Belmont Ave. That is near the intersection of Girard and Parkside, and it would seem odd to have two ball parks within that proximity. Perhaps the LOC image is simply mislabelled? --LarryMac | Talk 15:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See [1]. It looks like the ballpark could easily have fit between Parkside and Girard along Belmont Street; there's no reason to assume that all three streets didn't form the outline of the park (you could fit a nice park in that triangle). I wouldn't be surprised if almost no modern trace remained of the park; many early parks were wooden structures that didn't last anyways, and neighborhoods can be built in their place leaving nothing obvious behind. I used to live near where West Side Park in Chicago used to exist; there is literally no sign of it anymore, see if you can find it here... Perhaps the LOC is correct in describing the location. --Jayron32 19:55, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That seems like it would make for a BIG ball park, especially back in the 1930s. Also note the description of the 44th and Parkside Ballpark mentions the train tracks, which to my mind would put the park west of Belmont/44th. Actually, if you look at Jayron's first GMaps link, switch to street view, place the little man at the intersection of Belmont and Parkside, look southwest and zoom in, you can see the "Memorial Park" sign and statue mentioned in the article. Of course there still might have been another park at Girard, but to me that seems unlikely. --LarryMac | Talk 21:03, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not really that big, Fenway Park looks about the same size and configuration of that triangular block. --Jayron32 21:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ballparks were often built on property leased from someone else, and once they ceased to be used, the owners would demolish the stands and develop the property into housing. One of the more famous ballparks, the Polo Grounds, was on land leased from the Coogan family. West Side Park probably was too. It's now occupied by a branch of the University of Illinois, which had no need to retain any part of the ballpark. Wrigley Field was built on a block leased from Chicago for 99 years. The 99 years is nearly up now, but the Cubs may have purchased the land by now. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Song at the End of the How i Met your Mother season 3 episode 17

Hey Everyone (:,

Does anyone know, whats the name of the song at the end of How i met your mother season 3 episode 17. It starts when Ted quits the friendship with Barney in the limousine... I really love this song [:. please, can anybody help me?

greetings Fabju — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.5.103.216 (talk) 20:25, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a link to the song so we can listen to it ourselves? Perhaps you can quote a snippet of lyrics? Something to go on would be helpful for us if we are trying to help you. --Jayron32 20:28, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sure.. http://www.cucirca.com/2008/06/03/how-i-met-your-mother-season-3-episode-17-the-goat/ , the music starts at 20:15 ... :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.5.103.216 (talk) 20:32, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know that it's actually a song? It sounds like just some stock instrumental music. See stock music as well as the related articles of stock photography and stock footage. Dismas|^(talk) 21:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Determining time signature

Is there a way to recognize a music's time signature just by listening to it (without looking at the score)? Aquitania (talk) 21:13, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you can feel the beat, sub-divisions of a beat, and groups of beats in a piece of music, you can make a reasonable prediction of the time signature the composer chose. However, be aware that there are multiple ways to notate the same aural rhythm, so the only way to tell the exact time signature the composer chose is to look at the score. --Bavi H (talk) 01:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most pop music can be reduced to one of two basic times: "3-time" and "4-time". Everything else is a derivative of these. As a (crappy) rhythm guitarist, I have learned to develop strum patterns based on a three-beat rhythm and a four-beat rhythm. Other time signatures (such as the distinction between 6/8 and 3/4 or between cut time and standard 4/4) are really down to the notation more than the sound of the music. There are some standards (for example, faster tempos are sometimes written in cut time to reduce the number of eighth notes in the score) but as Bavi indicates you can usually write the same piece of music in different time signatures with no difference apparent in the final product. Even the 3/4 vs. 4/4 distinction can be confused by things like triplets which can give 4/4 music a 3/4 feel. With rock music especially, you can spot the time signature usually pretty easily because much rock music is built on the riff and on pretty simple drum and bass rhythms which you can track pretty easily. Even with the occasional rock song built on an unusual time signature (like, say Money by Pink Floyd, which is in 7/4 time), you can easily count off the time signature by tracking the riff through the song. --Jayron32 15:31, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hanks and the Ranch

Resolved

85 Solved it!!!!!

So in the end, does Hanks go back to the ranch? Shell (Nut Case) (talk) 22:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the end of what? Dismas|^(talk) 22:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming in the end of Castaway with Tom Hanks? If so, well it's left for the viewer to decide isn't it? ny156uk (talk) 22:59, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reasonable suggestion. I Googled -Hanks Ranch- but didn't come up with anything meaningful. I was expecting something more recent than Castaway though! Dismas|^(talk) 23:03, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cast_Away...Hanks expression, just before fade-out, makes me thinks he goes back to the ranch. What really bothers me is that the package never gets opened. My money was on a volleyball net. Shell (Nut Case) (talk) 23:11, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As Ny156uk said, it's left up to the viewer to decide. If you'd like to discuss this, there are many film forums on the internet though the Wikipedia Reference desks are not one of them. Dismas|^(talk) 23:13, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss what Dismal? I just had a question on whether Hanks goes back to the Ranch. I had no intent to make you behave so rudely, my apologies. Shell (Nut Case) (talk) 23:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe next time, one way of ensuring you don't get people off-side from the outset is to spell out what you're actually asking about. "Hanks and the Ranch" could mean a whole lot of different things, but would mean absolutely nothing to someone who'd never seen Castaway. Heck, I saw that movie but it didn't ring any bells with me. A mere mention of the word "Castaway" would have helped here. We're here to help you, but you need to play your part, too, by giving us questions that are not as vaguely worded as yours was. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 00:58, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this will answer your Castaway questions --Amerq (talk) 01:02, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Amerq, your link was most helpful. (I am still working on what was in the package though) Jackof: Your point it moot. Ny understood my question, clarified and answered it. Dismal was not ignorant of the subject when he decided to be rude and point me off of this site. I recommend no bonus pay this month for the 2 of you. Amerq and Ny get 1 gold star each. Shell (Nut Case) (talk) 01:32, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, ny156uk did not "clarify" your question; only you could ever have done that. Ny assumed he knew what you were talking about, but ended that assumption with a question mark, meaning he was inviting you to confirm or deny. Which you did. You're the one who clarified the question, when asked to do so. All I'm saying is: make it so that we don't have to go through these hoops in the first place. The word "Castaway" in your original question would have achieved that. As for no bonus pay for not being a mind reader - I'll probably cry myself to sleep about that. But I'll have to wait to find out whether I do or not, because, well, I'm not a mind reader. :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very well. You still have a chance for that bonus pay and a star if you can correctly answer the question of the package contents. Shell (Nut Case) (talk) 01:58, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First, it's Dismas with an s. Or was that supposed to be a slight aimed at me? Second, we don't get paid. Wikipedia is a volunteer effort. And lastly, open ended comments such as those that you left are often attempts to engage us in debate or discussion. I was simply trying to head that off. All in all, I think I gave you the same courtesy that you extended to us by making us guess what you were talking about. Dismas|^(talk) 02:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I accept your apology, but can't help you with the salary issue Dismasl( I think you forgot the 'l', when you corrected me). No need to head anything off, if you can't think of an answer, maybe you should work on another question instead of insulting me with your opinion on where I should go. By the way, I googled the letters for the package but havn't found anything yet. Shell (Nut Case) (talk) 03:03, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't actually apologize but if you want to read that into my comment... I have no power over that... Dismas|^(talk) 00:46, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The movie does not answer the questions you're asking. Was there a novelization of the movie? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this (number 5 of the list) can help.--85.55.205.179 (talk) 09:26, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

85.55.205.179 THANK YOU!! You are the bestest Research Desk (entertainment) answer dude ever! It wasn't the volleyball net that I had bet on, but now I finally know. This is the best answer since Brett solved Jules burger question!!!!! Shell (Nut Case) (talk) 11:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

However much I do like the quip about the package in Castaway, most film people will agree that the answers provided at that article are fanciful, and that movies must be judged by what actually got released, not what some draft with discarded ideas used to say. That's why when J.K. Rowling claimed Dumbledore was gay, some critics disputed this, and they were right to do so, pointing out that there was no support in the text for this, and that Rowling was just making stuff up afterwards. Similarly, Ridley Scott tried to ruin it for everyone by stating flat-out that Deckard was a replicant, but, again, the movie itself is ambiguous, and therefore there is no definite answer. (I believe Hampton Fancher was quoted afterwards that he had written Deckard as a human. See the problem?) In Castaway, it is undefined (as a programmer would say) whether he goes back to the ranch, and it is undefined what is in the box. That's why you were directed to a chat forum. There is no actual answer to the question within the context of the film, and questions that have only speculation as answers aren't really the remit of the Reference Desk. Comet Tuttle (talk) 14:30, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. When they say "viewers can decide for themselves" what so-and-so did, what they really mean is viewers can assume what so-and-so did, or fantasise, or hope, or believe. They cannot "decide", because that would require some factual evidence, of which there is, by definition, none. Even if the author says so-and-so did X even if the film doesn't actually depict it, that's still only in the author's mind. From the film's perspective, it never happened at all. Even authors are controlled by their own texts, because there'd be no point in actually getting the story down on paper or converted to film, if the story or the film is considered to be "whatever the author says he has in his mind". Minds are known to change. Writing means writing, not just thinking. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:10, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From my perspective, there are answers that are not imprinted on the film that exist. That an observer of the film doesn't a) see the obvious answer or b) derive an answer based on clues, does not necessarily make the reality of it that there was nothing in the box or that it is undefined. My perspective is that the truth can be gathered from information in the film and information gathered from the project itself. From another perspective, it could only be answered by the prop manager/fabricator. To me though 85 is spot on. Shell (Nut Case) (talk) 14:54, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Surprisingly, nobody has mentioned the MacGuffin article... Dismas|^(talk) 00:46, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again, there is no information in the film about whether the Hanks character goes back or not. Whatever might happen after "The End" is strictly up to the imagination of the viewer, and is a different movie. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:20, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Amerq and 85 already provided diffs proving what really happened. Everything else above I see seems to be uncited speculation. Its like Marcellus briefcase or Almira's shoes, the answer is there if you look in the right places. Shell (Nut Case) (talk) 02:12, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another interpretation: The woman in the pickup truck was his guardian angel. Pepso2 (talk) 03:39, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to assume that a draft of the script contains the "real" answer, that's up to you. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:36, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]