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.

March 7

Age and birthday of Korean musician Jihae

In her article, Jihae (musician) is claimed to be born on February 7, 1974, but the cited source says her age was 27 in 2016. Consequently, most interwikis date her birth in 1989, while "February 7" is not mentioned at all in the source. Polish Wikipedia claims she was born in 1980/81. Does anybody know for sure? --KnightMove (talk) 01:59, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

She has posted about her birthday on 7 February multiple times on her Instagram, and this post in particular implies that she was born that day in 1974 or 1984. The confusion seems likely to have stemmed from the fact that another musician, a member of the kpop girl group Girl's Day, also uses the mononym "Jihae," and her birthday is 14 May 1989. The Variety article you referenced probably mistakenly used this date to calculate the other Jihae's age, and this article combined with the other Jihae caused the other date to be cited elsewhere. (East Asian age reckoning may also play a role in some of the variations.) I can't find any evidence, however, pointing to either '74 or '84 over the other, so I've updated the original article to list just the day and I'll add a topic to the talk page to this effect. (fugues) (talk) 04:17, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 11

truetvmovies.com

Does truetvmovies.com produce real discs or fake discs because some of the movies they release on DVD are still in copyright date. Matthew John Drummond (talk) 16:20, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Real and fake have nothing to do with copyright. Copyright is a question of legality, not reality. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:38, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So does that mean there DVDs are fake. Matthew John Drummond (talk) 17:08, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By "fake" do you mean "counterfeit"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:17, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Unofficial" is the term used on specialized sites like Discogs. And, yes, those DVDs would be unofficial. Xuxl (talk) 18:32, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Commercial homage". Clarityfiend (talk) 19:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 15

Posthumous chess grandmasters

Resolved

Has anyone ever become a GM posthumously in the normal fashion (i.e. not the honorary GM titles like Sultan Khan's)? It might theoretically be possible in the case of a GM-elect who attained the norms, but died between the title application and the next FIDE council meeting. Double sharp (talk) 10:19, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that this may never have happened. Per Grandmaster (chess), there are about 2000 GMs. Like anyone else, they are mere mortals. Guessing 30 to be the average age of newly created GMs, they last for about 50 years, so to keep the number steady each year some 40 new GMs are created, so in total something like

N

= 2800 since 1950. Creation events are quarterly, so the time between application and creation is on the average something like 1/8th of a year. The mortality rate for applicants may be estimated as being

μ

= 0.001 (see the graph at Late-life mortality deceleration). The expected number of posthumous GMs is then 1⁄8

μN

= 0.35. Assuming a Poisson distribution (applicants not all taking the same flight), the probability of no events since 1950 is about 70%. At this rate, it will take another 70 years or so for the probability of at least one event to rise above 50%. ‑‑Lambiam 10:47, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Having just taken the time to look through list of chess grandmasters, I can now answer my own question: no, this has never happened. The closest it came to happening appears to be the case of Igor Ivanov (1947–2005), who attained the title in the year of his death on the basis of norms actually achieved in the 1990s. Double sharp (talk) 16:55, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 16

Hockey Player Biographical Information Formatting

What is the reasoning behind formatting hockey players’ biographical information differently than other major sports, such as football, soccer, basketball, or baseball? The lack of timeline for teams played, as well as career accomplishments being buried, as shown on Wayne Gretzky’s page, makes the article harder to read than other athlete pages. Joenah02 (talk) 03:23, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is that some sort of "rule" within a hockey project, or is it simply customary for some unknown reason? If the latter, maybe you could add the years for each team. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:58, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "reasoning" behind this. All of Wikipedia's content is created by volunteers, including such templates as {{Infobox ice hockey biography}}. In the almost 19 years since its first version was created, 64 volunteers have expanded or otherwise modified it in over 700 edits, without central coordination but more like ants building an anthill. Apparently, either none saw an urgent need for adding timelines, or else did not have enough time. ‑‑Lambiam 01:34, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If nothing else, you could try putting some of that info in, for your favorite hockey player, and see if anyone objects. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:31, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This will require modifying the template, which is currently protected so that only template editors and administrators can edit it. ‑‑Lambiam 17:12, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I went to the Wayne Gretzky article and had no problem adding years to the listed teams. (Did not save, though.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:08, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed – perhaps incorrectly – that the OP was referring to (a lack of) information presented conspicuously in the infoboxes, as opposed to "being buried" in the text. ‑‑Lambiam 13:36, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at players such as Babe Ruth, Tom Brady, Lebron James and David Beckham, the way the years are presented in the infobox varies, but at least it's there. Hard to know for sure what the OP really wants. Given how seldom they edit it might be years before they get back here. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:01, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 20

ST TOS

Who gives G/PG ratings for shows that weren't rated originally? One streaming network gives TOS a G while another gives a PG DMc75771 (talk) 03:16, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: "TOS" is a term used by its fans to refer to the original series Star Trek. As to the question, I have no idea. --142.112.221.85 (talk) 03:29, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If a movie or telelvision show does not include a rating in the metadata, some streaming services will rate it themselves. If no rating is provided, NR is often used to indicate Not Rated. But, that is not optimal because NR will not show up if you ask for media that is PG-13 or lower or if you ask for R or higher. NR is nothing and is not higher or lower than any other rating. So, to make it easier to find media, the streaming services want to plug some form rating in. It may be from whomever was adding the media to the database. It could be pulled from public ratings, averaging out to the most commonly suggested one. 12.116.29.106 (talk) 13:10, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 21

Pride and Prejudice 1983 60 Minutes

I've recently been looking through all the adaptations of Pride and Prejudice and one of them I've really been struggling to find information about is the 1983 version which was shown as an episode of the tv series 60 Minutes, broadcast on 5 December 1983 and it starred Peter Sallis and Patsy Rowlands. So does anyone know any information about it. Also has this 1983 version ever been released on DVD by itself or on any 60 Minutes DVD's. If it hasn't been released on DVD is it available to watch online. Matthew John Drummond (talk) 17:03, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you have the program name correct? 60 Minutes is a news magazine show, not a drama. I find it incredibly hard to believe that 60 Minutes would ever produce such an episode.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:05, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that he was in a stage production of P&P at that time. Could this simply be some sort of news piece on the play?--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 21:11, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb doesn't have entries for individual segments of an episode. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:34, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't supposed to, true. But that doesn't mean that some well-meaning idiot won't add such a thing.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 23:20, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link; 5 December 1983 was the opening night in the Ashcroft Theatre, Croydon. ‑‑Lambiam 23:41, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The episode from 1983 is shown on IMDB. Matthew John Drummond (talk) 21:56, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That has now been deleted. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:13, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb doesn't show any such credit for either person, nor did I expect it to. 60 Minutes? Seriously? That's like Mike Wallace auditioning for The Gong Show. It's vandalism. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:50, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly, IMDb shows two entries for a 60 Minutes episode for that date: Pride and Prejudice and non-PaP. I have reported the issue to IMDb. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:23, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean that Pride and Prejudice 1983 is ment to be an episode of different tv series not 60 Minutes. Matthew John Drummond (talk) 22:45, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It could be a different series. It could be simple vandalism. Or it could be what I suggested above, a 60 Minutes report about the play. We don't know. What we can assume is that it is in some way erroneous. 60 Minutes is not a drama series, it is a news magazine.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 22:52, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The obvious assumption would be that it was a report about the production. 60 Minutes often had reports about cultural events. They wouldn't actually present the production itself. If nothing else, it would be hard to cram the entire story into 60 minutes minus commercials. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:29, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's worth pointing out that Dec 5, 1983 was a Monday. 60 Minutes is always on Sundays, far as I know. Could it be there is an unrelated UK program called 60 Minutes? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:43, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

60 Minutes (disambiguation) only lists news programs. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:48, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the IMDb entry for PaP displays the 60 Minutes stopwatch. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:57, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was indeed such a UK programme [sic, it being British], Sixty Minutes (British TV programme), which is a more likely candidate given that the production mentioned by Khajidha and linked by Lambiam was in Britain by a then-prominent British theatre company. It too was a news magazine programme, and ran during 1983 and 1984 (so the dates match), replacing the earlier and better-known Nationwide, and being superceded by the Six O'clock News.

It's quite plausible that this programme carried a report on the production; it's unlikely that each weekday broadcast had a formal title, but perhaps the P&P title was added by a contributor to IMDb as an additional identifier. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.64.108 (talk) 00:37, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The IMDb page has now been deleted, but when it was up it mentioned Don Hewitt, so it must have been for the CBS news magazine 60 Minutes. If the IMDb contributor intended to mark attention given by the BBC1 programme Sixty Minutes to the theatrical production of David Pownall's dramatization, they were both quite confusing and quite confused. ‑‑Lambiam 12:26, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Confusion will be my epitaph." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.64.108 (talk) 22:31, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 22

What game is this?

I was going through some family photo albums and came across this image. My uncle and grandfather are playing a game that I'd always assumed was Connect Four. Upon closer inspection, it's either not that game or not a standard game of it. Connect Four came out four years prior, in 1974, which could be enough time for knock-off or spin-off versions to be developed. Can anyone tell me what game this is? Matt Deres (talk) 02:01, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's "Triple Up" from the Ideal Toy Company, like in this image. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 02:33, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]