Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2014 September 5

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.

September 5

Write an article

How i will write an ariticle on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Er. Mohit Iyer (talk • contribs) 05:28, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

If I were you, I'd first practice my English by writing a blog or the like. Then confirm that the subject matter you have in mind is consistent with WP:NOT. —Tamfang (talk) 08:17, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Your first article. --Jayron32 09:37, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Life line of rupees

The reference desk is for questions, not for political and financial rants. JIP | Talk 06:27, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
From being shoulder to shoulder with the U.S. dollar, the Rs. Now is on “free-fall”. A look back and peak into the life line of a RUPEE that how it has moved against $ 1947:$1 = Rs.1 India gain Independence! 1966:$1 = Rs.6.35 Govt. devalues rupee to encourage exports! 1973:$1 = Rs.7.67 Oil crises breaks out; govt. enacts FeRA to clamp down on illegal foreign transactions! 1975:$1 = Rs.8.41 Govt. imposes political emergency! 1985:$1 = Rs.12.36 Rajiv Gandhi govt. launches first stirrings of liberalization through long- term fiscal policy! 1991:$1 = Rs.22.69 India mortgages gold to wriggle out of a dire balance of payments crises! Finance Minister Manmohan Singh dismantles the industrial licensing regime in a budget that marks the beginning of India’s economic reforms! 1992:$1 = Rs. 31.44 India moves to a full market determined exchange rate system after merging the dual rates of the transitional liberalized exchange rate management system (LERMS) introduced by RBI earlier! 1996:$1= Rs.35.43 Import licensing abolished & tariffs brought down substantially! 1997:$1 = Rs.36.32 Finance Minister P. Chidambaram presents “dream budget” bringing down tax rates! 1998:$1 = Rs.41.27 An Asian currency crisis hits the world: the rupees sinks to new low! 2002:$1 = Rs.48.60 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PM LA) enacted forming the care of the legal framework to combat illicit monetary transaction across countries! 2004:$1 = Rs.45.32 UPA govt. with Manmohan Singh as P.M comes to power. 2006:$1 = Rs.45.31 India’s growth rate hits a record 9.8% on the back of high domestic and global demand! 2008:$1 = Rs. 43.50 Wall Street icon Lehman Brother collapses fusing the world economy into its worst crises in 8 decades! 2009:$1 = Rs.48.40 UPA govt. returns to power! 2010:$1 = RUPEE GETS A SYMBOL 2012:$1 = Rs.53.32 Govt. announces retrospective taxation of corporate deals spooking investors. Rupee counters past 55, touching 57 P. Chidambaram returns as finance minster, a string of reformist move including plans to push India on the path of fiscal consolidation. NOW:$1 = Rs.68.80 US Federal Reserve Chief Ben Bernanke hints of withdrawing cheap money policy amid signs of recovery in the US. Rupee plunges to a new low breaching 68.80 to a dollar despite a slew of measures including Forex controls on individuals & companies. Govt. appoints “Raghuram Rajan” as RBI governor replacing D. Subbarao! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Er. Mohit Iyer (talk • contribs) 05:34, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Movie/TV scene

Recently, for nostalgia purposes, I've been trying to identify TV/movie scenes I remember seeing in my childhood. About ten years ago, I saw a funny "action scene" on TV. The only scene I remember is that the main hero won a fight with a large group of heavily armed mooks. After defeating the large group, a much smaller group of lightly-armed mooks (who looked like very unintimidating teenage girls) came in and subdued him very easily. When he asked how they defeated him, they said something like "we're not stupid; we attack all at once. Not one at a time. The scene was a lot funnier on screen than what I can describe, but I can't remember where it was from, or even the context of this fight. Can anyone help me identify this scene? --50.46.159.94 (talk) 08:07, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Why do fairy tales look like they come from the Middle Ages?

Whether the movie is Ella Enchanted (2004), Frozen (2013), or Once upon a time (TV series), the movie looks as if it comes from the Middle Ages, in some European country, with A LOT of anachronistic beliefs, speech, and props. When did people have this fascination with the Middle Ages? Why is it rarely set in Ancient Greece, during Aesop's time? Are there fairy-tale stories that actually set in Aesop's time or Charles Perrault's time? 71.79.234.132 (talk) 21:38, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

In the case of Ancient Greece, that might bring up the topic of people who believed in multiple gods, not something many Christians want to teach their children. However, there were lots of Middle Eastern Sinbad type movies, and let's not forget Aladdin (1992 Disney film). Also Lilo & Stitch (set in Hawaii) and Pocahontas (1995 film) (set in mainland US). There are also lots of children's films set in Europe, but in the industrial age, such as Mary Poppins, Peter Pan, and Alice in Wonderland. StuRat (talk) 22:54, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Some tales do go back as far as ancient Greece, but many of what we think of as "fairy tales" were first written down in the 1700s or 1800s, using versions of the stories that were maybe a few hundred years older than that, i.e. dating from the actual Middle Ages. So that is the setting that is fossilized in literature. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:41, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

• The answer is thus: Fairy tales date to generally the late 18th and early 19th century (see, for example, Grimms' Fairy Tales, Hans Christian Andersen, etc.) These fairy tales have a solid foundation in the literary movement known as Romanticism, which among other characteristics, rejected what was then the modern paradigm (the Age of Enlightenment) and instead saw a rise in nationalistic folklore as a source of literary inspiration. What was seen as the old-timey folklore of the 18th century was the romanticized vision of the chivalrous knight, princesses and castles, and all that jazz. It's in this same context that tales such as Robin Hood and King Arthur reach the forms we recognize today; The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood and the Idylls of the King took the well known characters out of their historical context and placed them in the idealized, romantic vision of high middle ages feudalism. Fairy tales get this same treatment during this same time period, and they thus became fixed in this context; which survives until today. --Jayron32 00:53, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

In addition to Jayron's excellent answer, there's some information at Fantasy_tropes#Medievalism and Fantasy_world#Common_elements and references therein. In fact, I'm fairly certain we had a much more detailed article about the pseudo-medieval world often used in fantasy, but I'm not seeing it now. Medieval fantasy and Mythic fiction are just stubs. I'll keep looking. Matt Deres (talk) 12:07, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

They don't really look like they come from medieval times. The classic stories tend to come from Perrault (1697) and Grimm (1812) and to look back to an earlier time ("once upon a time"), but not to a time that is ancient. So these are really stories of early modern times, not medieval times. Of course, from our vantage point it can be difficult to distinguish among pre-industrial periods, but there are occasional indications of relative modernity, such as when characters in fairy tales have muskets (e.g., Sleeping Beauty, Bluebeard). John M Baker (talk) 04:39, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

If the protagonist is wearing pants, he's from "these days". If he's wearing steel, he's from "those days". If he's wearing a robe, he's prehistoric and if he's naked, he's probably just a legend. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:30, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

But seriously, Jayron seems right. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:30, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

"Lucky socks never washed" ever happened or just TV trope

Has there ever been a high level professional athlete who had socks or some other article of clothing that it was revealed to the media that they actually didn't wash out of some superstitious belief that that had anything to do with their success, or is that just a trope with no known actual occurrences? 75.75.42.89 (talk) 11:44, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes it has happened in reality. In baseball, a number of players never want to clean their batting helmet, and it gets grimier with pine tar and dirt as the season moves along, to a point where you can't see the team logo; Vladimir Guerrero was famous for that, but there were others. I also recall a pitcher who was having a good year and did not want to change his lucky cap. By the end of the season, it was so faded that umpires instructed him to change for a new one, as it was no longer matching his teammates' uniform. I can't recall who that was, however. --Xuxl (talk) 09:00, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

I found the reference I was looking for: it was Vida Blue. See here under 1977 [1]. He apparently used the "lucky cap" for more than one season before being forced to give it up. --Xuxl (talk) 10:09, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

The fictional Boober Fraggle was famous for washing socks. But he had a lucky hat, which enabled his superstitious bravery. Didn't use it for sports, though, he was against those. Maybe I should be writing this small. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:56, 8 September 2014 (UTC)