How does Wikipedia ascertain release dates for albums? You seem to be able to provide more detailed info than any music site - why is that. Also, if you wouldn't mind clarifying how you came up with January 13, 1969 as the day Dusty in Memphis by Dusty Springfield came out I'd appreciate it, as it contradicts allmusic's March 1969 date.99.27.217.251 (talk) 01:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These are not entertainment questions but enquiries regarding the editing of individual articles, and would more profitably be placed on the talk page of the articles concerned. Britmax (talk) 22:40, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are many governing sports organisations in Australia- for example the Australian Rugby League, Netball Australia, etc. My question is what role does the government (federal, state) play in these organisations? I assume they are non-governmental.

Thanks in advance, 110.174.151.109 (talk) 02:32, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about Association football, FIFA's rules prohibit involvement by governments in sports governing bodies, and recently suspended the Greek national association for breaching this rule (and also Kenya, and Iraq). --TammyMoet (talk) 08:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just asking in general- how about other sports? What is the level of government "control" in them? 110.174.151.109 (talk) 10:55, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does anybody have any information concerning the parentage and lineage of the adtor Dennis Waterman. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.239.152 (talk) 10:21, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not much - but.... This says that "He was the youngest of nine children in a traditional Cockney working class family." According to this interview, he "grew up on a council estate in south-west London, the youngest of nine children..." and says that he "was six years younger than the last [sibling], so I was the baby of the family." From this: "His father had been a boxer before Dennis was born and then a ticket collector and his mother made loose covers and curtains." Any help? Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering how did the expression Man with No Name come to be. In the very first film of the Dollars trilogy- A Fistful of Dollars, Clint Eastwood's character goes by the name Joe.--^Nilotpal42 16:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to Roger Ebert's review of The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, "Eastwood's character, the famous Man With No Name, was an invention of the publicists; he was called Joe in the first movie, Manco in the second, and Blondie in the third." Coincidentally, there was a story about Eastwood and the trilogy in the Toronto Sun (and associated newspapers) today, but it doesn't discuss this. I guess it's just that if you are not paying close attention, he never seems to be referred to by name, and the three names that are used sound more like nicknames or something, not a real name. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure those were his actual names. There are other characters that call him those names, but I think he was deliberately supposed to be nameless. For examble, in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, Eli Wallach's character "Tuco" is the only person who calls Clint Eastwood's Character "Blondie", I had always assumed this was a bit of a slur against him, since Tuco is Mexican while The Man With No Name is American, kinda like calling him "Gringo" or "Yanqui" or "Whitey". Other characters have to address him, and at those times they use something, but I don't see from the films any evidence of these being his actual name, or even a widely accepted alias. --Jayron32 04:10, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A bit like The Virginian, who was also a man with no name. He was always referred to simply as The Virginian.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:56, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want the real-world history of it and not the in-movie history... The idea of a man with no name began with the first film, which is based on Yojimbo. In Yojimbo, the main character has no name. Why? Many people believe it is because it is based on Red Harvest, in which the main character has no name. Kurosawa has been noted as claiming that Red Harvest isn't the only book that influenced Yojimbo. The other books were narrated by the same "no name" character, The Continental Op (his job title, not his name). Now, where did Hammett get the idea for narrating his books by a man with no name? He said he wrote about real people. Perhaps he avoided using a name to avoid exposing who the real person was. -- kainaw™ 21:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would be good karma if the Man with No Name rode on A Horse with No Name. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:32, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Christopher Frayling discusses this in the DVD commentaries on the first two films and states that the Man with No Name was a marketing gimmick for the US release. The gimmick suggests that the Eastwood character is the same man in each film, which is not necessarily the case from the films.

To follow on from Jayron though, Manco is also a nickname, and Frayling suggests 'Joe' is a fairly generic name applied to Americans. (For another common name used as a nickname, see Fritz). AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 15:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the mid-1960s there was a TV western series The Monroes (1966 TV series) in which was featured a Native American character by the name of Jim. He was played by actor Ron Soble. Does anyone know whether or not Soble was a Native American?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:57, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Soble lived from 28 March 1928 to 2 May 2002. His obituary released by the Screen Actors Guild is listed below. (From reading this, it seems like he might warrant a Wikipedia article.) — Michael J 19:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Yes, he certainly does merit an article at Wikipedia. The obit makes no mention of his ancestry however. Thank you again for your help.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 19:48, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How long does a movie run in theaters before it's discontinued? Does it vary by movie?

Americanfreedom (talk)

Yes to the second question. Movies keep being shown as long as (a) the theatre is contractually obligated to show them and (b) people are willing to pay to see them. According to this, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial didn't go home for over a year, but the mantle of longest run goes to The Rocky Horror Picture Show. (I imagine Rocky XXIV would have a much shorter run.) Clarityfiend (talk) 21:01, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Star Wars, the 1977 original, ran in my home theater for like 6 months. That's some serious "legs". More recently, Walk the Line was still showing first run in my local theater even after the DVD had been released. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:23, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Those were the days when theaters used to advertise how long a movie had been running. Often a movie would play at only one cinema in a city, and if the ads said it was "Now in its 4th month" there, you knew that a lot of people liked it. Today we have more screens showing fewer movies because the same movie opens at all the multiplexes simultaneously, and the publicity is about "opening weekend box office" instead, which only measures how much people liked the pre-release advertising. Here in Toronto 2001: A Space Odyssey played at one cinema (the Glendale, the only one in the city equipped for Cinerama) and it ran there for over 2 years! --Anonymous, 02:14 UTC (edited 03:14), June 7, 2010.

Pathetic! Those figures pale into insignificance when stacked up against the heavyweights of Indian cinema. Sholay and Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge stacked up multiple years of continuous runs; according to our article DDLJ - released in 1995 - completed 750 weeks of continuous play (almost 15 YEARS!) earlier this year, I'm pretty sure it's still showing. Sholay keeps getting re-run every few years or so as well. And these aren't new audiences either, this is simply just people going to watch the movie over and over again. Zunaid 11:23, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, the above-mentioned Rocky Horror still wins: "Still in limited release 35 years after its premiere, it has the longest-running theatrical release in film history" Rmhermen (talk) 15:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky Horror is still running? Great Scott! :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:40, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think one of the longest recent US runs was My Big Fat Greek Wedding which had a "first run" of 52 weekends—a full year!—in 2002-03. cmadler (talk) 12:15, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are far more movies released in theaters now than there used to be. So, they are quick to replace a movie with a new one. It wasn't that long ago (less than 20 years) that movies would regularly stay in a first release for many months. It didn't even have to be a great award-winning movie. Something like Crocodile Dundee would have an initial release of 4-6 months. What I found interesting was the 1-day release. If a movie had no sales on Friday, it could be pulled instantly. It is hard to remember the titles (since they were pulled so quickly). One was 52 Pickup. I remember that because we joked about it being 52-card Pickup. Another one I remember was a very poor remake of Rear Window. I believe it starred Steve Guttenberg. Nobody bought a ticket to it, but two ladies came out of the theater halfway through and asked for a refund. -- kainaw™ 17:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Box Office Mojo suggests that US theatres are obligated to keep a movie for two weeks. This page on their site shows what they call "theatre drops," which compares the number of screens a movie ran on in its second (and, so the site says, final) contractual weekend versus the number of screens it's on in the third weekend of release. It's a pretty telling gauge to a movie's popularity (or lack thereof). --McDoobAU93 (talk) 01:33, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zunaid's comment above reminded me of a small movie theatre in Paris I visited a long long time ago (late 80's). It had been showing nothing but one and the same movie for years, Les enfants du paradis. Oddly, I wasn't able to find anthing online. Perhaps it no longer exists. I think it was an art nouveau type venue, perhaps originally a theatre building, but, again, I wasn't able to find it. Anyone know anything about this? I was also wondering if there are perhaps other not-so-commercial playhouses in other cities that have been showing one and the same classic movie for years. ---Sluzzelin talk 11:26, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a cinema in Vienna that shows The Third Man once a week, for understandable tourist-y reasons. But it shows other films as well. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 11:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky Horror Picture Show is still on it's original relase. Some theatres have been showing it (weekly at least) for a long time (20+ years). Zoonoses (talk) 12:16, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your replies. Once again, I read too quickly and missed the RHPS reference given above. ---Sluzzelin talk 06:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]